dig ; 


Xr XE 


ΤῊΣ YE RC EN AC E 


EE 
UT 


ar: 


a ei u ILL search ann ο ου een 


ο cd 
EL  υ-υ,, nn nt on ri - * " ΕΞ --Ξ-ΞΞΞΞ Ξ r r nee oe 


ο ER DI Cams t Τ πα τν 


οἱ ὕω Sheologieyy Sen; 
K 
5 


PRINCETON, N. J. 


e" 


Presented by Ve : Gy RF. €5 IS an. 


THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


THE CONSECRATION OF THE 
EUCHARIST 


A STUDY OF THE 


PRAYER OF CONSECRATION 


COMMUNION OFFICE 


FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE 


ALTERATIONS AND AMENDMENTS ESTABLISHED 
THEREIN BY THE REVISERS OF 1789 


BY THE 


v 
REV. HENRY RILEY GUMMEY, JR, D.D. 


RECTOR OF GRACE CHURCH, HADDONFIELD 
NEW JERSEY 


WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY THE 


REV. WILLIAM JONES SEABURY, D.D. 


CHARLES AND ELIZABETH LUDLOW PROFESSOR OF ECCLESIASTICAL 
POLITY AND LAW IN THE GENERAL THEOLOGICAL 
SEMINARY, NEW YORK 


PHILADELPHIA 
THE HENRY F. ANNERS PRESS 
LONDON 
THE DE LA MORE PRESS 


1908 


COPYRIGHT, 1907, 
By HENRY RILEY GUMMEY, JR. 


AU rights reserved. 


Printed by the 
WICKERSHAM PRINTING Όο., 
Lancaster, Pa., U. S. A. 


To 
THE RIGHT REVEREND 
OZI WILLIAM WHITAKER, D.D., LL.D. 


BISHOP OF PENNSYLVANIA 


bat 


T3 
ἘΠῚ 
v 

A Jú 
malt 
JW 


ΟὟ 


INTRODUCTION 


8 CHELSEA SQUARE, NEW YORK, 
Christmas Eve, 1906. 


THE Rev. Henry RILEY GUMMEY, Jr., D.D., 
My dear Doctor : 


Your gracious reguest that I should contribute some- 
thing by way of introduction to your book in regard to the 
use of the Invocation in the Prayer of Consecration in the 
Eucharistie Service confers great honour upon me. Both 
my regard for you and my appreciation of the value of your 
work combine, however, to make me wish that you had made 
choice of some other pen than mine to perform this impor- 
tant office. It seems hardly possible that anything which 
I am able to say should be either necessary by way of ex- 
plication of what you have written, or instrumental in ex- 
tending the knowledge or acceptance of it. But since it is 
your wish thus to associate me with your labours, and since 
I am conscious of deep interest both in the subject which 
you have treated, and in the manner in which you have 
treated it, I do not think myself justified in declining to 
give expression to some of the thoughts which your discus- 
sion has suggested, or at leäst brought freshly home to my 
mind. And if such expression can in any way serve to the 
better appreciation of the need and usefulness of your work, 
it will afford me sincere pleasure. 

It is not to be expected that after so many years of con- 
troversy in regard to the nature and meaning of the Holy 
Eucharist, both in general and in detail, anything new can 
be devised either in the way of misconstruction and perver- 
sion, or of explanation and defence: and accordingly, the 

γα 


viii INTRODUCTION 


question which lies back of your argument is so old as to 
have been in dispute for many centuries; to have been in- 
strumental in maintaining the great schism between East 
and West; and to have been the subjeet of divers opposing 
views in different parts of those main divisions. 

It is admitted by those who regard the Holy Eucharist 
as the divinely appointed memorial of the Sacrifice of the 
death of Christ, that in perpetuating this memorial the 
Church is bound to carry out the will of its Divine Founder 
in the institution of it. But, apart from other differences 
in regard to the will of Christ in this matter, there is the 
partieular question whether the Church is to carry out that 
will by the appointed use of Bread and Wine in imitation 
of the aet of Christ with or without words; and, if with 
words, as appears to have been conceded, then with what 
words: whether only with those words which He Himself 
is recorded to have used; or also with words of such charac- 
ter as, though not expressly recorded, it is apparent from 
the record that He did use. Or, as the question is practi- 
cally and specifically put, does the repetition in the Eucha- 
rist of the words of Institution as they are called, effect the 
consecration of the Bread and Wine appointed to be used; 
or is it further necessary, strictly speaking, that the Holy 
Spirit should be invoked to operate upon, and make opera- 
tive to their proper end these appointed elements ? 

It is the purpose of your argument to maintain that it is 
the duty of the Chureh, in its effort to fulfil the will of 
Christ in the perpetuation of this memorial, to use for the 
consecratlon of the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist not 
only the words which our Lord used in the Institution: 
“This is my Body,” ete., but also to use with those words 
such further words as pray that the Holy Spirit will sanctify 
those elements in respect of which Christ used His words 
of Institution to the end which He designed in that Insti- 
tution. It does not seem to me proper that I should here 
anticipate your argument, or seek to add either to its force, 
or to the citations with which your learning has sustained 


INTRODUCTION 1X 


it. But it may perhaps open the way to the readier and 
more just appreciation of the argument, if some preliminary 
consideration be bestowed upon the nature and design of 
the Service to which it relates. 

To the casual reader of the story οἵ Christ as recorded in 
the New Testament it might appear that His last Supper 
with the twelve whom He had associated with Him, was a 
solemn and tender ending of their companionship, and an 
event which He wished them to cherish in their memories 
of a friend whom they were soon to lose. That His words, 
however, were not only general and abstract, but spoken 
together with His use of Bread then broken by Him, and of 
Wine which had been poured into the cup then held by 
Him, while He declared the one to be His Body broken, and 
the other His Blood shed, would suggest to any except the 
most thoughtless that there was a connection between the 
two in each case which, whatever its nature, purported 
something more than mere associations of personal friend- 
ship brought to a sad and never-to-be-forgotten conclusion 
in a farewell refreshment. 

To those who, recognizing this indication, found it in 
accord with their belief in the Sacrifice of the death of 
Christ, there might come the conviction that the purpose 
of His action was to leave behind Him, in foreknowledge of 
His erucifixion, a means by which His disciples might al- 
ways keep within their holy remembrance the death which 
He had suffered for them. "Thus the Bread broken and the 
Wine poured out would be to them a pieture, or presenta- 
tion to the mind, of that death, accomplished by the sepa- 
ration of His Body and Soul, figured by the Bread — the 
emblem of His Body, separated from the Wine— the em- 
blem of His Blood —the Blood being “the life." To such 
a believer this might be a sufficient explanation of the act 
performed, and of the reason of the act performed, in the 
last Supper: his eating and drinking of the elements would 
be resolved into an act of obedience to a command; and 
memory, refreshed by renewed obedience, would strengthen 


x INTRODUCTION 


his faith in the Sacrifice of the Cross thus figured before 
him. 

If, however, the believer in the Sacrifice of the death of 
Christ realized that this very expression involved offering 
to the Father, he might be conscious that the memorial of 
that Sacrifice enjoined in the last Supper would be as lively 
a figure or depiction of it to the mind of the Father, as to 
that of the disciples of Christ. Whether it were necessary 
that such memorial should be made to God, would be a 
separate question; but the fitness of the memorial for the 
setting forth of the Sacrifice would be as proper and com- 
plete in the case of presentation to the Father, as in the 
case of presentation to the disciples. Hence the connection 
between the elements of Bread and Wine and the Body and 
Blood of Christ in His action of the Supper, would suggest 
the connection of the offering of the one with the offering 
of the other; and that what Christ really did in the Supper 
was to offer to the Father that Body and Blood of His Sac- 
rifice which He declared the Bread and Wine to be. If this 
were so, the memorial which He desired to be perpetuated 
would be the offering of Bread and Wine to picture to the 
Father the offering of the Body and Blood depicted by those 
elements; or, conversely, the offering of the Body and Blood 
under those forms or representations of them which Christ 
appropriated and empowered for the purpose. Such a con- 
ception as this would obviously involve the idea of the sac- 
rifielal action of our Lord at the Supper; which would be 
in conformity with the type of the Passover which He was 
then fulfilling, in conformity also with His use of terms of 
the present and not of the future in referring to His Body 
and Blood as at that very time given and shed, and in con- 
formity further with the overwhelming significance of the 
fact that from that time on He is no longer a free agent, 
but simply passive in the hands of those who fulfilled the 
predetermined crucifixion , so that if Christ did not at that 
time offer Himself, there 1s no evidence in the historical 
record of His having offered Himself at all. And it would 


INTRODUCTION xi 


seem equally obvious that this sacrificial action of our Lord 
would involve the offering both of the elements, and of that 
which they were appointed to represent; of the Bread and 
Wine as representing the Body and Blood, of the Body and 
Blood as represented by the Bread and Wine. But, if such 
were the significance of the action of Christ in the Supper, 
which action He commanded to be imitated or rečnacted ; 
such would be the significance of that which was afterwards 
done in the Church in obedience to His command. 

I am far from presuming to describe the process of the 
mind of the Church in its fulfilling of the command of 
Christ in the continued observance of the Holy Eucharist: 
but it seems to be matter of fact that the universal Church 
from the earliest times of its known history has regarded 
- that Service as a Sacrifice; as a Sacrifice of the creatures of 
Bread and Wine, both in their material character and in 
their representative character as appointed and empowered 
to be for that purpose the Body and Blood of Christ; and 
thus, as the Sacrifice instituted by Christ for memorial be- 
fore the Father of His one oblation of Himself once offered. 
It is true that this Sacrifice having been always offered 
with prayers and praises and thanksgivings, and with the 
devotion of ourselves to God, some in later times have con- 
ceived of the Christian Sacrifice as consisting only of the 
offering of ourselves and of our prayers and praises. But, 
notwithstanding some historical instances of special empha- 
sis upon these, it would seem that there has always been in 
the mind of the Church the consciousness that these, in and 
by themselves, were not acceptable to God; and that they 
needed, in order to their acceptance, to be associated with 
the offering of the Sacrifice of Christ; so that they are al- 
ways offered for acceptance through Him and His Sacrifice, 
and thus, most eminently, in connection with the Sacrifice 
of the Eucharist— the Oblation in which becomes the 
medium of their acceptance. 

So far as my reading has been enabled to instruct me, 
there is no question but that the Church always and every- 


xii INTRODUCTION 


where and with the concurrence of all adhering to its com- 
munion until the times of later disagreement has understood 
that it was fulfilling the command of Christ at the Institu- 
tion by offering the Sacritice of Bread and Wine in the 
Eucharist to the Father of all, first as creatures, to agnize 
Him as the Giver of all good; and secondly as creatures 
specially set apart to the appointed use of representing be- 
fore the Father the Body and Blood of the Sacrifice of 
Christ completed on the Cross: so that the offering of the 
Church in the Eucharist has been first material, and secondly 
mystical; first of the Bread and Wine, and secondly, though 
of course chiefly, of the Body and Blood signified thereby. 
The Chureh offers then in this Sacrifice not only Bread. and 
Wine, but also the Body and Blood of Christ; the one in 
fact, the other in mystical significance — though both in 
equal reality in their several kinds, 

I need not qualify or explain these expressions. I am 
speaking of the common judgment of the Church that the 
Sacrifice is offered not only as material, but also as mystical ; 
and to present before the Father by way of memorial the 
one perfect and sufficient Sacrifice of Christ as He appointed 
it to be presented. And I believe it to be correct to say 
that in the exercise of this judgment the Eastern and Roman 
and Anglican Churches have always in their Liturgies made 
provision for the oblation of the Bread and Wine as such, 
the Eastern and Roman Churches providing also for the 
oblation of the Bread and Wine in their mystical import as 
made by Christ's appointment to be His Body and Blood. 
In the ease of the Angliean Churches, excepting the Scot- 
tish and American members of that group, while there is 
no formal oblation in this import, yet it cannot fail to be 
inferred to be within the intent of those Churches from the 
mere fact of their professing in their consecration to con- 
tinue that perpetual memory which Christ instituted, with 
the means used by Him for the Institution, and with the 
words used by Him in the Institution. 

In all these cases, with so far as I know one ancient ex- 


INTRODUCTION xlii 


ception, of somewhat doubtful applieation, the use of the 
words of Institution is accounted sufficient to confer upon 
the elements that charaeter which qualifies them to be re- 
ceived by the Father as the memorial which the Son has 
commanded to be made before Him of the one oblation of 
Himself once offered. The words of Institution originally 
used by Him to confer upon the material creatures of Bread 
and Wine the capacity of representing the-Body and Blood 
‘offered to the Father, have by His appointment the same 
effect in the same use of them by the Church. "The Bread 
and Wine not ceasing to exist in either instance, become by 
the designation of those words of Institution in a true but 
mystical sense, the Body and Blood of Christ offered in 
Sacrifice to the Father. In the Supper, the Bread and 
Wine still existing were declared by Christ to be His Body 
and Blood broken and shed; yet His Body unbroken with 
His Blood as yet unshed were present at the same time. It 
remains that the Bread and Wine were His Body and Blood 
for the purpose of that Sacrifice; and that by His authori- 
tative words they aequired the character or capacity of being 
such for that purpose. And it seems to have been the judg- 
ment of the Church that the use of the same words by His 
commandment, aecomplished the same purpose in the Eu- 
charist; making the Bread and Wine to have, in addition 
to that which they had by nature, the character or capacity 
of being the Body and Blood of Christ for the purpose of 
the offering then made — which by the same command was 
the purpose of memorial of that already consummated once 
for all, but forever presented and pleaded both in Heaven 
and on earth. 

Thus it may appear that the Christian Church, in com- 
mon with its forerunners of the Patriarchal and Mosaic Dis- 
pensations, has never lacked the characteristie of Sacrifice 
in its worship: nor has the Christian Sacrifice, more than 
either the Patriarchal or Mosaic Sacrifices; failed to be a 
material Sacrifice. The difference is that the material Sac- 
rifice of Christian worship has been made the medium and 


xiv INTRODUCTION 


instrument of a higher spirituality, and of the more specific 
offering of that Sacrifice of Christ which the Sacrifices of 
the previous Dispensations dimly shadowed, but the very 
image of :whieh is by way of memorial set forth before 
the Father in the mystical import grafted by the Son upon 
the gifts and creatures of the Bread and Wine of the Pas- 
chal Supper. It is unnecessary for the present purpose, 
though it would be a study of interest and edification, to 
consider the exact correspondence of the Sacrifices of previ- 
ous Dispensations with the Christian Sacrifice. But one 
can hardly forbear a passing comment upon the strangeness 
of the fact that, notwithstanding these often demonstrated 
correspondences; notwithstanding too the universal practice 
of the religious systems of the world — for what Religion 
was ever without Sacrifice ? — there should be in modern 
religious thought an ‘aversion to the idea of Sacrifice in 
Christian worship; and, particularly, so great contempt of 
the idea of a material Sacrifice in that worship. Most per- 
verted conceptions of spirituality surely are those which 
would presume to substitute human feelings, human aspira- 
tions, human words, emanating from that most deceitful-of 
all things the human heart, for that simple obedience which 
is involved in compliance with the positive Divine institu- 
tion of the offering of the Eucharistie Bread and Wine with 
their mystical import of the Body and Blood of Christ. 
This, after all, is not only the true worship, but the true 
spiritual worship; since it was the one form of worship in- 
stituted by Him Who taught that those who would worship 
the Father must worship Him in spirit and in truth. 

It is true indeed that our Lord also taught His disciples 
a form of prayer; but prayer is not essentially, or in itself, 
worship. It is rather an incident of, or an attendant upon, 
the worship whereby it is conveyed and becomes acceptable. 
And no other form of worship except the Christian Saeri- 
fice did our Lord institute; nor has the Church ever re- 
garded her own prayers and thanksgivings — not even the 
Lord's prayer which she has always used with it— as sub- 


INTRODUCTION ΣΥ 


stitutes for that instituted worship, but only as reverent 
and becoming appendages to it. 

But while the great witness of the Church East and West 
— practically undivided as to this — is a standing protest 
against this modern depravation of Christian worship, it is 
not so clear in regard to another aspect of the Eucharistie 
Sacrifice, as to which there has come to be an almost equal 
want of appreciation. And that the force of the Church’s 
testimony to the truth in this respect has been somewhat 
impaired may, perhaps, be largely due to the disagreement 
between East and West for many centuries as to that ques- 
tion which it is your endeavour in the following pages to 
elucidate; the question, namely, of the duty of invoking 
the Holy Spirit upon the oblations of Bread and Wine in 
the Eucharistie offering. 

There are two essentially distinct, though mutually 
operating functions of the Redeeming work of Christ, 
which, naturally, are manifest in the means by which He 
has condescended to make that work applicable to His 
disciples. He represents Himself, and is represented in 
the whole prophetic and historical delineation of His work, 
as our Redeemer; as having purchased by the Sacrifice of 
Himself our exemption from the penalties in which we 
were justly involved, and from the power of the Evil One 
under whose bondage mankind had fallen. His work, 
therefore, is that of Atonement, and of the reconciliation 
of God with man. He is also presented to us as perform- 
ing the corresponding work of reconciling man to God, and 
of imparting to man such grace as may enable him to over- 
come evil with good, and to become acceptable to God in 
the participation of His righteousness. So that His Sacri- 
fice, based upon and expressing His Redemptive covenant 
with the Father, is both an atonement or expiation for our 
sin, and also a gift, to those who in faith and love will 
receive it, of the participation of His own life in which we 
are accepted with Him. And the grace which by His 
Sacrifice is procured for us is ministered to us by the Holy 


xvi INTRODUCTION 


Spirit, whom He sends to us from the Father. Accordingly, 
He impressed upon His disciples, and explained to them 
so far as they could bear it, not only that He was to be 
offered in Sacrifice for the sins of the world, but also that 
His offering was to be received back as a means of life to 
the world. And nothing, surely, but His thinking in the 
language of Sacrifice could account for His very plain and 
unique teaching as to Himself being the “ Bread of life 
which came down from Heaven"; and as to the Bread 
whieh He would give being His Flesh which He would 
“give for the life of the world." 

Standing therefore at the close of the Mosaie Dispensa- 
tion, and having with His disciples religiously partaken 
of the Paschal Lamb prefiguring His own Sacrifice, as of 
the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world and which 
taketh away the sins of the world, the Christ not only 
designates the Bread of the Paschal offering as His Body 
and the Wine offered with it as His Blood, but also with 
words of blessing and thanksgiving equivalent to sanctifica- 
tion, He gives back those Holy Gifts, in mystie import His 
Body and Blood, to become their spiritual food and suste- 
nance. Asin the Paschal rite, the Lamb offered had been 
received again and eaten; so here in the foundation of the 
Christian Sacrifice that which is offered with Christ’s 
designation as His Body and Blood is received again to 
be reverently consumed. 

It is in the light of this idea, that that which, in estab- 
lishment of solemn covenant, is offered to God in the way 
of Sacrifice by His worshippers is received back by His 
gracious gift for their refreshment, that we seem to get the 
clearest conception of the nature of the Sacrifice of the 
death of Christ and of the nature of that Sacrifice which 
He ordained for its perpetual memorial. Christ, obedient 
unto death, yea even unto the death of the Cross, is to offer 
Himself; and the offering, accepted for our Redemption, 
is to be given back for our salvation — for the sustenance 
in us of the life which is in Him; for the preservation of 


INTRODUCTION xvii 


body and soul unto the life everlasting. And, therefore, 
at the last Supper, in view of the consummation of this 
offering and in present fulfilment of it and of its applica- 
tion, He devotes Himself; voluntarily laying down the life 
which otherwise no man had taken from Him; exhibiting 
in a mystery His Body broken and His Blood shed; and, 
in the eontinuance of His priestly function, gives back to 
those who were associated with Him in that sublime act 
of worship that which had been offered, that it might be 
by them consumed. And this which He had done, He 
commanded them in all its true significance to do for a 
memorial of Him. 

In full realization of this federal idea, the general char- 
acteristic of Sacrifice, the Church has ever perpetuated the 
memorial thus instituted; offering in the ordained memorial 
mystery of Bread and Wine the Body and Blood of Christ’s 
Sacrifice, and then giving back for the manducation of the 
faithful in the same mystery that which has been previ- 
ously offered. 

Now if this Sacrifice were merely material, the Bread 
and Wine offered to God might conceivably without any 
expressed words be received back for refreshment in token 
of participation in our sacred covenant with Him, as would 
appear for the most part to have been the case with the 
material Sacrifices of preceding Dispensations. But since 
the materials here used are symbolical, and since the offer- 
ing is not only of the symbols but also of that which they 
symbolize, and since that which we receive back for our 
refreshment is not merely the symbols but that also which 
is symbolized, there is certainly need of some operation to 
impress upon those symbols the special character whereby 
they become effectual means of imparting that which they 
symbolize. By nature they are Bread and Wine. By desig- 
nation and appointment of the Divine authority of Christ 
they become mystically the Body and Blood of His offering. 
By the exercise of Divine power they are returned to us 
impressed with the character or capacity of being the 


xviil INTRODUCTION 


effeetual means of our participation of the Body and Blood 
of Christ offered for us. 

From the earliest ages it seems that the Church has al- 
ways recognized the operation of this Divine power in 
enabling these symbols to communicate to us that which 
they were ordained to symbolize. In the simplicity of 
original faith, not needing to be guarded against the subtle 
perversions of later controversy, the difference between the 
symbols and the things symbolized was wont to be plainly 
expressed as the difference — produced by conseeration — 
between Bread and Wine, and the Body and Blood of Christ. 
And the change effected by the consecration was, and indeed 
always has been in one form or other, attributed to the 
Divine power, and not to human capacity. Living in the 
dispensation of the Holy Spirit, and recognizing Him as the 
Lord and Giver of life, and the source of all sanctification 
and effectual operation in the fulfilment of the Divine Will 
on earth, it was natural that in the freshness of its unsullied 
faith the early Church should attribute to His operation the 
sanctification of the memorial offerings of the Eucharist to 
the effectual participation in the precious gifts denoted by 
them; and that to this end it should invoke the Holy Spirit 
in words of solemn prayer. This it certainly did. This 
the Eastern Church has continually done. This, by the 
singular grace and providence of God, the American Use — 
derived by tradition from these venerable sources through 
the agency of the Scottish Church influenced by the fleeting 
vision of the light which shone in the first gleams of the 
English Reformation—has been enabled to express in 
most fitting and exalting form; to God’s great glory and 
our own ineffable benediction. 

That the great Roman Communion should have departed, 
in so important a particular of the venerable Sacrament of 
Christian Unity, from the traditional usage of other ancient 
Churches; and, as there is good reason to believe, from her 
own original integrity in this respect, is matter of profound 
grief. 


"INTRODUCTION xix 


That the English Church should have submitted to have 
the voice of her clear testimony, in the dawn of the Refor- 
mation, to this primitive usage stifled by the malevolent 
repressions of Continental reformers playing, consciously or 
unconsciously, into the hands of Roman manipulators of 
Catholie truth, is matter of grief mingled with just 
resentment. 

That it should have become possible to find inheritors 
of the renewed tradition of the ancient testimony in the 
American Use, capable of belittling, and with earping words 
disparaging that tradition to which they have had the un- 
deserved grace of succeeding is matter which, however 
lamentable, is after all merely consequent upon the two 
already mentioned. 

Doubtless God, all mereiful and infallibly discerning the 
thoughts and intents of the heart, can and does receive and 
respond to the effort of the Church in all tiınes and in all 
places to do for His memorial that which Christ commanded 
to be done; and His gift of the grace of the Body and Blood 
of Christ is effectually administered by His Holy Spirit in 
recognition of that effort, with whatever imperfections made. 
Were the case otherwise, who could have confidence in any 
offering of worship, however faithfully made, or however 
intentionally based on the Divine command. But the 
cherishing of this convietion in all humility, should not 
hinder our devout and painstaking effort to ascertain al- 
ways, so nearly as our powers and our sources of informa- 
tion permit, what provision God has made for His own 
worship, and in what manner He desires us to seek the 
blessings which He is fain to bestow. And when in regard 
to any particular of such service we find all the analogies of 
the Divine Revelation substantiated and applied in the 
usage of the Church in the ages nearest to the close of that 
Revelation, we may not weakly surrender the teaching of 
that tradition to the subtleties of later ages, nor at the dic- 
tation of an unauthorized assumption of dominion over our 
faith. 


XX INTRODUCTION 


To the explanation and maintenanee of one such most 
important tradition you have devoted your faithful endea- 
vours; and it is in token of my desire to further these en- 
deavours, in such wise as I can, that I venture to submit 
to the preliminary consideration of your readers the 
general account of the nature and design of the Holy Eu- 
charist which I have now concluded. It has not been with- 
out hesitation that I have presumed to express myself upon 
a subject of such profound meaning, and.as to which there 
have been so great differences among godly and well learned 
men. But as in the process of time the point of view in 
which truth is regarded is continually shifting, so there is 
the constantly recurring obligation to renew the witness to 
that truth with the closest adherence to its elementary and 
original significance which we can possibly attain. Thus 
to speak involves, to my mind, the reception with implicit. 
faith of that which has been revealed, as interpreted by the 
witness of most primitive tradition, and in a sense conform- 
able to right reason. That which is thus revealed and wit- 
nessed may sometimes be beyond the power of reason fully 
to understand, but is not on that account repugnant or 
contrary to reason: and our faith is only distinguished 
from superstition, as laying hold upon that which is in 
itself reasonable, though beyond the invention of reason. 
Never based upon reason as its authority, a true faith is 
necessarily consonant with reason: otherwise it ceases to 
be faith in the proper sense of that word, and becomes 
superstition. This is true not only in regard to specific 
parts of the scheme of Redemption like the Eucharist, but 
in regard to the very scheme of Redemption itself. The 
whole scheme and all its essential parts are in a certain 
proper sense artificial; being not natural, but supernatural. 
It is in that view of them, indeed, that they are sometimes 
by high-minded and eandid men rejected as unworthy to be 
considered as Divine; though if it be admitted that God is 
the Artificer of the system of nature, wherein it would be 
accounted unreasonable to refuse to believe that which is 


INTRODUCTION xxi 


not understood; I know not why we should be called upon 
to deny that God is able to have a system of grace, if it so 
please Him; or why we may not believe that as the Arti- 
ficer of that system He has conceived the scheme of Redemp- 
tion to supply that whieh nature is incapable of bestowing, 
and which He was in no imaginable way bound to have 
made nature capable of bestowing. 

Be this as it may, the scheme of Redemption, with all its 
essential parts, is proposed to us not as of nature, but as of 
grace; and thus as matter of faith, which though not evolv- 
able by reason, is yet conformable to reason. The more 
conformable therefore any matter of faith — exactly stated 
and not explained away — is to reason, the more cogent is 
the constraint of our faith in regard to it. And the effort 
to exhibit the Eucharist as a reasonable service, and not an 
engine of superstition, cannot justly be disparaged except 
upon grounds equally applicable to the whole scheme of 
which it is so august a part. 

With all good wishes, 
Very truly yours, 
Wm. J. SEABURY. 


AUTHOR'S PREFACE 


Iw the consideration of the Consecration of the Eucharist, 
the obvious starting point for any writer is the Eucharistie 
Prayer of the Liturgy used in that part of the Church 
Catholic to which he owes allegiance. Thus for a member 
of the Orthodox Eastern Church, the point of departure 
would be the Anaphore of the Liturgies of S. Chrysos- 
tom and S. Basil; for a member of the Roman Church, 
the Canon Missae; and for a member of the Anglican Com- 
munion, the Prayer of Consecration contained in the 
Communion Offiee of the Book of Common Prayer. But, 
inasmuch as this Prayer of Consecration is not uniform 
throughout the Angliean Communion, it becomes necessary 
to make a choice between the two different forms in general 
use at the present time. The distinctively English form, 
which dates from 1552, is too meagre and jejune to afford 
a satisfactory basis of inquiry. Its defects and blemishes, 
known only too well to many of those who have been com- 
pelled to use it, render it unfit for such a purpose. So 
unsatisfaetory indeed was it held to be, that the Revisers 
cf 1789 took advantage of the opportunity afforded them, 
and moulded the Prayer of Consecration into what we may, 
not untruthfully, call its final Anglican form. We may 
fairly hold, therefore, that the Prayer of Conseeration in 
the American Communion Office is to be regarded as more 
completely and perfectly expressing the mind of the Angli- 
can Communion in this particular, and may appropriately 
use it as the standard of comparison. 

In order that we may have the details of this change 
clearly before our minds, let us put the English Prayer of 
Consecration and the Prayer of Consecration as altered and 
amended by the Revisers of 1789, in parallel columns: 

ΧΧΙ1 


ENGLISH 1 


Almighty God, our heavenly Father, 
who of thy tender mercy didst give 
thine only Son Jesus Christ to suffer 
death upon the cross for our redemp- 
tion, who made there (by his one ob- 
lation of himself once offered) a full, 
perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, obla- 
tion and satisfaction for the sins of 
the whole world, and did institute, 
and in his holy Gospel command us 
to continue a perpetual memory of 
that his precious death, until his 
coming again ; 


[quasi-Invocation] 

Hear us, O merciful Father, we 
most humbly beseech thee, and grant 
that we receiving these thy creatures 
of bread and wine, according to thy 
Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy 
institution, in remembrance of his 
death and passion, may be partakers 
of his most blessed. body and blood: 


Who in the same night that he was 
betrayed took bread, and when he 
had given thanks, he brake it, and 
gave it to his disciples, saying, Take, 
eat, this is my body which is given 
for you, do this in remembrance of 
me. Likewise after Supper he took 
the cup, and when he had given 
thanks, he gave it to them, saying, 
Drink ye all of this, for this is my 
blood of the New Testament, which 
is shed for you and for many for the 
remission of sins: Do this, as oft as 
ye shall drink it, in remembrance of 
me. nen. 


AMERICAN ? 


All glory be to thee, 

Almighty God, our heavenly Father, 
for that thou, of thy tender mercy, 
didst give thine only Son Jesus Christ 
to suffer death upon the Cross for our 
redemption ; who made there (by his 
one oblation of himself once offered) 
a full, perfect, and sufficient sacri- 
fice, oblation, and satisfaction, for 
the sins of the whole world ; and did 
institute, and in his holy Gospel com- 
mand us to continue, a perpetual 
memory of that his precious death 
and sacrifice, until his coming again: 


For in the night in which he was 
betrayed, he took Bread; and when 
he had given thanks, he brake it, and 
gave it to his disciples, saying, Take, 
eat, this is my Body, which is given 
for you; Do this in remembrance 
of me. Likewise, after supper, he 
took the Cup; and when he had 
given thanks, he gave it to them, 
saying, Drink ye all of this ; for this 
is my Blood of the New Testament, 
which is shed for you, and for many, 
for the remission of sins; Do this, 
as oft as ye shall drink it, in remem- 
brance of me. 


THE OBLATION 

Wherefore, O Lord and heavenly Father, according to the institution of 
thy dearly beloved Son our Saviour Jesus Christ, we, thy humble servants, 
do celebrate and make here before thy Divine Majesty, with these thy holy 
gifts, which we now offer unto thee, the memorial thy Son hath commanded 
us to make; having in remembrance his blessed passion and precious death, 
his mighty resurrecticn and glorious ascension; rendering unto thee most 
hearty thanks for the innumerable benefits procured unto us by the same. 


THE INVOCATION 
And we most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to hear us; 
and, of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe to bless and sanctify, with thy 
Word and Holy Spirit, these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine; 
that we, receiving them according to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ’s 
holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be par- 
takers of his most blessed Body and Blood. 


1 Text from Sealed Book, 1662, 2 Text from Standard Edition, 1892. 
xxiv 


ENGLISH! 


{First Post-Communion Prayer | 


O Lord and heavenly Father, we 
thy humble servants entirely desire 
thy Fatherly goodness, mercifully to 
accept this our sacrifice of praise and 
thanksgiving; most humbly beseech- 
ing thee to grant, that by the merits 
and death of thy Son Jesus Christ, 
and through faith in his blood, we 
and all thy whole Church may obtain 
remission of our sins, and all other 
benefits of his passion. And here 
we offer and present unto thee, O 
Lord, our selves, our souls and bodies 
to be a reasonable, holy, and lively 
sacrifice unto thee; humbly beseech- 
ing thee, that all we who are par- 
takers of this holy Communion, 


may be 
fulfilled with thy grace and heavenly 
benediction. 


And although we be unworthy 
through our manifold sins to offer 
unto thee any sacrifice; yet we be- 
seech thee to accept this our bounden 
duty and service; not weighing our 
merits, but pardoning our offences, 
through Jesus Christ our Lord; by 
whom, and with whom, in the unity 
of the holy Ghost, all honour and 
glory be unto thee, Ὁ Father Al- 
mighty, world without end. Amen. 


NB. 


AMERICAN ? 


And we earnestly desire thy fatherly 
goodness, mercifully to accept this 
our sacrifice of praise and thanks- 
giving; most humbly beseeching 
thee to grant that, by the merits and 
death of thy Son Jesus Christ, and 
through faith in his blood, we, and 
all thy whole Church, may obtain 
remission of our sins, and all other 
benefits of his passion. And here 
we offer and present unto thee, O 
Lord, our selves, our souls and bodies, 
to be a reasonable, holy, and /iving 
sacrifice unto thee; humbly beseech- 
ing thee, that we, and all others who 
shall be partakers of this Holy Com- 
munion, may worthily receive the 
most precious Body and Blood of thy 
Son Jesus Christ, be filled with thy 
grace and heavenly benediction, and 
made one body with him, that he may 
dwellinus, and we in him. And al- 
though we are unworthy, through 
our manifold sins, to offer unto thee 
any sacrifice; yet we beseech thee to 
accept this our bounden duty and 
service; not weighing our merits, 
but pardoning our offences, through 
Jesus Christ our Lord; by whom, and 
with whom, in the unity of the Holy 
Ghost, all honour and glory be unto 
thee, O Father Almighty, world with- 
outend. Amen. 


In the American columns, heavy face type marks additions; heavy 


face italic type marks alteration of words, or changed position of words 


and clauses. 


RUBRIC FOR THE CONSECRATION OF ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS 


English! 

If the conseerated bread or wine be 
all spent before all have communi- 
cated; the Priest is to consecrate 
more according to the form before 
preseribed: beginning at [Our Sa- 
viour Christ in the same night, «c.] 
Jor the blessing of the bread ; and at 
[Likewise after Supper, &c.] for the 
blessing of the cup. 


1 Text from Sealed Book, 1662, 


American ? 


If the consecrated Bread or Wine 
be spent before all have communi- 
cated, the Priest is to consecrate 
more, according to the Form before 
preseribed ; beginning at, All glory be 
to thee, Almighty God, and ending 
with these words, partakers of his 
most blessed Body and Blood. 


2 Text from Standard Edition, 1892. 


ΧΧΥ 


XXVl AUTHOR'S PREFACE 


The differences between these two editions of the Prayer 
of Conseeration are evident upon the surface. The Eng- 
lish Prayer of Consecration consists merely of a brief state- 
ment that God has redeemed the world through Christ's 
death, and that Christ has commanded His Church to 
observe the memorial of that sacrifice, followed by a very 
weak guasi-Invocation, which is, in turn, succeeded by the 
Narrative of the Institution and nothing else. It has not 
even the customary ending of a prayer, “through Jesus 
Christ our Lord," or the like. The American Prayer of 
Conseeration, on the contrary, opens with an ascription of 
praise to God for the redemption made by Christ, and for 
the appointment by Christ of the Eucharistie memorial 
thereof. It omits the poor weak (English) quasi-Invoca- 
tion, adding at once the Narrative of Institution as the 
explanation of the previous statement. After the Narrative 
follows The Oblation of the elements, and then The Invoca- 
tion of the Father's blessing upon the elements just offered.! 
In these two parts the Scottish Office of 1764 was followed, 
with the exception of a slight change made in the wording 
of the latter half of The Invocation. The English prayer 
thus lays stress primarily upon the recital of the Narrative 
of Institution, while the American emphasizes the petition 
to God for consecration. This difference, too, is made 
plainer by the differentiation of the rubrie for a second 
consecration of elements. The English specifically states 
a “form” of consecration for each element, 1.6. the repeti- 
tion of Christ's words “This is My Body,” and “This is 
My Blood," respectively ; whereas the American rubrie 
regards the whole prayer, from its beginning, to the end 
of The Invocation as the “form.” This is a difference of 


1 The fourth (and concluding) paragraph of the American Prayer 
of Consecration is equivalent to the first English post-communion 
prayer, the petition for worthy reception being somewhat amplified in 
view of the changed position of the prayer. This is not included in 
the “form of consecration, however, and therefore calls for no 
detailed examination. 


AUTHOR’S PREFACE xxvil 


no slight magnitude. The English Prayer of Consecration, 
taken in connection with its accompanying rubrie for a 
second consecration, is the expression of the most extrava- 
gant * Western" view (socalled) of Eucharistie consecra- 
tion. The American Prayer of Consecration, on the other 
hand, taken in connection with its accompanying rubric for 
a second consecration, is the deliberate expression of the 
“Eastern” view as to the proper mode of consecrating 
Christ's Eucharistic memorial. In fact it is even more than 
that; itis the expression of the mind of undivided Christen- 
dom, and of the mind and practice of all the Oriental 
Churches, schismatical as well as Orthodox, down to the 
present time. 

Until a eomparatively recent period, moreover, it had 
always been understood that the Revisers of 1789 had made 
these “alterations and amendments" in the Prayer of Conse- 
eration with deliberate intent to bring it into accord with the 
whole of Eastern Christendom, and with the primitive and 
undivided Church, in its rationale of Eucharistie consecra- 
tion. Within the lifetime of the present writer, however, the 
attempt has been made to engraft the modern Roman cere- 
monial of the Canon Missae upon the American Prayer of 
Consecration by insisting that the repetition of “ This is 
My Body,” ete., is the consecration, and that The Invocation 
is merely ἃ prayer for the worthy reception of elements 
already consecrated. Nor only so, but even to allege that 
the slight ehange (from the Scottish) in the phraseology 
of The Invocation, as adopted in 1789, was made in order 
to render it meaningless, i.e. so far as its being a prayer 
for the consecration of the elements was concerned. The 
arguments with which this attempt has been supported bear 
a striking resemblance to those whereby Roman contro- 
versialists have endeavoured to subvert the plain mean- 
ing of the Epiklesis in the Eastern rites, and to introduce 
discord, if possible, into the Eastern Church. Yet so 
widely has the. parallel perversion become current in the 
Ameriean Church, that it has seemed advisable to prepare 


xxvlli AUTHOR'S PREFACE 


a handbook on the question of Eucharistie consecration, 
with the object of affording to those perplexed a means of 
guidance out of the labyrinth of sophistry and evasion in 
which the promulgators of the modern Roman theory 
of Eucharistie consecration would fain keep them immured, 
and to state results in so positive and non-controversial 
a fashion as to serve the interests of “truth, unity, and 
concord? in promoting loyalty to the plain meaning and 
grammatical construction of the Prayer of Consecration as 
revised in 1789. 

The plan adopted therefore in this brief treatise has 
been to regard the American Prayer of Consecration as the 
full and final expression, in this particular, of the principles 
of the English Reformation. For the appeal to antiquity 
had been soberly and seriously made, and two centuries 
of careful study, by Anglican theologians, of the subject of 
Eucharistie consecration inter alia bore fruit in 1789. 
Taking then this, the latest development of the Prayer of 
Consecration in the Anglican Communion, as the point from 
which to view the question under consideration, we have 
(1) to examine the phraseology and construction of the 
American Prayer of Consecration, in order to determine 
its rationale; (2) to test this rationale by the data afforded 
us in the New Testament; (9) to inquire of the Fathers, 
and to look into the liturgical witness of the Undivided 
Church, and to see whether the early tradition has been 
maintained unbroken until to-day; (4) to see whether the 
so-called * Western ” theory of Eucharistie consecration is 
really ancient, by an examination of the Canon Missae, and 
of the ceremonial that accompanied it in earlier and in later 
times; and (5) to trace the steps of the process of recovery 
of the ancient Catholic tradition, touching Eucharistic con- 
secration, in the Anglican Communion, which culminated 
in the deliberate alteration and amendment of the poor, 
meagre, unsatisfactory English Prayer of Consecration into 
the present truly primitive and Catholic Eucharistic prayer 
by the Revisers of 1789. 


AUTHOR’S PREFACE ΧΧΙΧ 


The treatment of the subject is of necessity somewhat 
condensed; writers quoted have been left to speak for 
themselves, as a rule, without much comment, and the 
intricate sophistries of those who strive to pervert history 
and Liturgy have been left on one side, as of no value in 
comparison with the plain facts of history and of Catholic 
liturgical tradition. Simplicity and the positive exposition 
of truth have been the dominant aims, and in order to 
facilitate the use of this handbook by persons not acquainted 
with Latin and Greek, the original quotations have been 
placed in the Appendix. 

In the course of the preparation of this treatise, the 
author has-been indebted to many friends for helpful sug- 
gestions and eritieisms, especially to the Rev. F. E. Bright- 
man, M.A., Prebendary of Lincoln, and Fellow of S. Mary 
Magdalen College, Oxford, and to the Rev. H. A. Wilson, 
M.A., Fellow and Librarian of the same col'ege; to the Very 
Rev. W. M. Groton, D.D., Dean of the Philadelphia Divinity 
School, and to the Rev. L. M. Robinson, D.D., and the Rev. 
A. D. Heffern, D.D., of the Faculty of that school. To the 
Rev. R. B. Burke, M.A., Assistant Headmaster and Chap- 
lain of the DeLancey School, I would express my most 
grateful thanks, not only for his kindness in reading and 
eritieising the work in manuscript, but for his valuable 
assistance in reading the proof of the Appendix. The Rev. 
Horace A. Walton, B.D., Rector of Paoli, Pa, the Rev. 
Louis K. Lewis, M.A., Librarian of The Athenaeum of Phil- 
adelphia, and Mr. Lorin Blodget, Jr., have also rendered aid 
in the revising of proof sheets. ΤῸ the Rev. H. E. Jacobs, 
D.D., Dean of the Lutheran Theological Seminary, Mount 
Airy, I am indebted for the courtesy of free access to the ex- 
cellent collection of German Liturgica of the sixteenth century 
in the Library of that school. ΤῸ the Rev. Dr. Seabury I am 
under many obligations, not only for his kindness in writing 
an Introduction to this treatise, but for the loan of valuable 
books from his private library, for permission to print from 
his letter to the late Dr. Brand in the Appendix, for allow- 


XXX AUTHOR'S PREFACE 


ing me to examine the manuscript correspondence and ser- 
mons of his great-grandfather, the Right Reverend Samuel 
Seabury, D.D., and for permission to copy extracts from the 
letter of the Rev. William Smith to Bishop Seabury quoted 
in Chapter V., pages 224—226. At the same time, no one is 
in any way responsible for the method and details of this 
handbook save the author himself. 

It should be added that Chapters L, IL, IIL, and V. 
were accepted by the Faculty of the Philadelphia Divinity 
School as a thesis preliminary to examination for the degree 
of Doctor of Divinity (in course) in the Epiphany Term of 
1905. After some revision, and with the addition of 
Chapter IV. to complete the subject, they are here set forth 
in the hope that, in spite of their obvious limitations and 
many shorteomings, they may not only serve to deepen the 
appreciation of that most precious heritage of the American 
Church, her Prayer of Consecration of the Holy Eucharist, 
and to encourage a loyal adherence to its plain meaning and 
rationale, upon the part of those who are privileged to use 
it; but may also serve to remind those who are held in 
bondage to the far inferior English Prayer of Consecration, 
of the signifieanee and value of the chief alteration and 
amendment of the Book of Common Prayer made by the 
Revisers of 1789,as expressing the sober and ripened thought 
of the Anglican Reformation, as carrying out into practice 
its appeal to Catholie antiquity, and thus constituting an 
important step toward the reunion of Christendom, around 
the Sacrament of Christ's love, as observed from of old in 
His Church. 


THE Rectory, HADDONFIELD, NEW JERSEY, 
Feast of the Transfiguration, 6 August, 1907. 


CONTENTS 


PAGH 
INTRODUCTION BY THE REv. WILLIAM JONES SEABURY, D.D. . vii 


AUTHOR"S PREFACE . : F : : A σπα 


CHAPTER I 


ΤΗΕ Text AND PHRASEOLOGY OF THE PRAYER OF CONSECRA- 
TION 1 “ : : Š : 2 s ς ἐ : 1 


Title in Rubrie preceding — Suggested by Laud — First 
appears in Book of 1637 — An Appropriate Title — Opening 
Ascription of Praise — Misplacement of Prayer of Humble 
Access— Emphasis laid upon Christ’s Death — Need for 
this— Narrative of Institution quoted — Source of this — 
Narrative embellished by Mimetic Gestures — Their Signifi- 
cance, especially the Last — 7'he Oblation — Text — Scope — 
Significance — The Invocation — Closely related to The Ob- 
lation — Text — Plain Meaning — Summary — Rationale of 
Eucharistic Consecration, according to the Prayer of Conse- 
cration and the Rubric for a Second Consecration of Ele- 
ments. 


CHAPTER II 


ΤΠΕ RATIONALE or EUCHARISTIC CONSECRATION IN THE NEW 
TESTAMENT . 3 Ξ ᾿ J x " 4 : 24319 


The Four N.T. Narratives— Text of S. Luke xxii. 14-20 
— Distinction between Last Passover and First Eucharist — 
Comparison of the Four N.T. Accounts— Uniformity in 
their Sequence — Significance of this Uniformity — Christ 
consecrated by His Act of Blessing — ΒΏὐχαριστεῖν and Εὐλογεῖν 
— **'The Cup of Blessing," 1 Cor. x. 16 —1 Cor. xiv. 16, 17 
— Romans xv. 16 —1 Timothy iv. 4, 5— Christ's Pattern 
of Eucharistie Consecration followed by His Church. 

xxxi 


ΧΧΧΙ CONTENTS 


CHAPTER II 


PAGE 
THE PATRISTIC WITNESS AND THE LITURGICAL TRADITION OF 
THE UNDIVIDED CHURCH ἃ 3 : : A b ὃν 


Unanimity and Continuity of Patristic and Liturgical 
Witness — S. Justin Martyr— S. Irenzus — Tertullian — 
Origen — S. Cyprian — Firmilian of Cesarea — Dionysius 
of Alexandria — S. Athanasius — Ethiopic Church Ordi- 
nances — Sacramentary of Serapion — Liturgy of Apostolic 
Constitutions, Book VIII. — S. Cyril of Jerusalem — Im- 
portance of his Witness — S. Basil of Czesarea — S. Ambrose 
— Discussion of his Testimony — Pseudo-Ambrose — S. Chry- 
sostom — Diseussion of his Opinions — Ephraem Syrus — 
Peter II. of Alexandria — Gregory of Nyssa— Theophilus 
of Alexandria — Nilus — S. Augustine — Jerome — The Greek 
Jerome — Isidore of Pelusium — S. Cyril of Alexandria — 
Proclus — Gaudentius of Brescia — Theodoret of Cyrus — 
Liturgy of S. James — Nestorian Liturgy of Addai and 
Mari— Abyssinian Anaphora of our Lord — Gelasius I. — 
Fulgentius of Ruspe — Cesarius of Arles — Fragment of 
Galliean Liturgy — Gregory the Great — Eusebius of Alex- 
andria — Eutychius of Constantinople — Anastasius Sinaita 
— John Moschus — S. Isidore of Seville — James of Edessa 
— Venerable Bede— John Damascene — Council of Con- 
stantinople, 754 — Second Council of Νίοσα, 787 — Liturgies 
of SS. Chrysostom and Basil — Chosroes the Great — Sa- 
monas of Gaza— Theophylact — Dionysius bar Salibi — 
Germanus of Constantinople — Theodore of Andida — Reply 
of Manuel — Nicholas Cabasilas of Thessalonica — Armenian 
Liturgy first faulted by the Roman Church — Symeon of 
Thessalonica — Council of Florence, 1459 — Isidore of Kieff 
— Syropulus — Mark of Ephesus — Gabriel of Philadelphia 
— Orthodox Confession — Synod of Jerusalem — Declaration 
to the Marquis de Nointel — Oath of a Russian Bishop — 
Eustratius Argentes — Longer Catechism of Russian Church 
Euchologion of Greek Church — Modern Commentary on 
the Liturgy — Holy Catechism of Bernardakis — Answer of 
the Great Church of Constantinople to the Papal Encyclical 
on Union. 


CONTENTS xxxllil 


CHAPTER IV 
PAGE 
Tue WirNEss or ΤΠΕ Roman CANON MISSAE ; ; αμ 

Statement of the Question— Roman Dominance in the 
West— S. Isidore of Seville— Ancient Gallican Rite — 
Prayers Post Secreta and Post Mysterium — Mozarabie Rite 
— Missal as edited by Ximenes — Witness of the Prayers 
Post Pridie — Liber Ordinum — Agreement with the East 
— Roman Canon Missae — Translation — Analysis — Sup- 
plices te, the Roman Invocation proper — Mgr. Duchesne's 
Comment on Supplices te — Summary — Rome originally at 
one with the East — Aleuin — Caroline Dooks — Theodulph 
of Orleans — Agobard of Lyons — Nicholas. I. — Rabanus 
Maurus — Ordo Romanus I. — Ordo Romanus II. — Ama- 
larius — Synod of Guierci — S. Blaise Sacramentary — Sum- 
mary — Dr. Iloppe quoted — Beginnings of Scholastic theory 
of Eucharistic Consecration — Paschasius Radbertus — Florus 
— Synod of Arras — Council at Rome — Oath of Berengar — 
Eusebius Bruno — Guitmund of Aversa — Durandus of 
Troarn — Berengar’s own Witness — Exaggeration of Pick- 
ing up of Bread and Cup — Remnants of Earlier Belief — 
Alser οὗ Liege — Peter Lombard — Durandus — Summary 
— New Doctrine of Consecration — Bruno οἵ Segni— Odo of 
Cambray — Honorius of Autun — Further Development of 
Lifting up the Elements — Hildebert of Tours — Stephen 
of Autun — Hugo of S. Victor — Differentiation of Picking 
up Elements and Elevation — Statutes of the Carthusians — 
Spread of the New Ceremonial — Synod of Paris — Richard 
Poore, Bishop of Salisbury — Stephen Langton — Synod of 
Worcester — Synod of Exeter — Development of the Cele- 
brant's Ceremonial — Ordo Romanus XIV. — Further De- 
velopments — John Burckard's Ordo Missae — Stereoty ped 
in the Missal of Pius V. for the Roman Church after the 
Reformation — This distinetively Modern Roman Ceremonial 
unlawful in English and American Churches. 


CHAPTER V 


Tue RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS IN THE ANGLICAN Cox- 
MUNION, 1540-1789 : . : : : ; : eg 

Invocation in the First Book of Edward VI.— Weakened 

Form in the Second Book, 1552 — Carlstadt — Luther — 


XXXlV CONTENTS 


PAGE 

Verba Testamenti — Cranmer's Imitation of German Models 
— Conservative German Kirchen-Ordnungen — Kaspar 
Kantz's Evangelical Mass — Pfalz-Neuberg K.O. of 1543 — 
Influence of the Antididagma upon Cranmer — Value of the 
weak Invocation retained in 1552 — Growing Appreciation 
of Early Tradition in regard to Eucharistic Consecration — 
Bishop Andrewes — Crakanthorp — Bishop Morton — Hay- 
ward — Bishop Cosin — Ilis Suggestion for improving the 
weak English Invocation — Bishop Forbes — Archbishop 
Bramhall— Dishop Jeremy Taylor— Herbert Thorndike — 
Bishop Wilson — L'Estrange — Dr. John Ernest Grabe — 
Bingham — Wheatly — B.C.P. for Scotland 1657 — Draft of 
Liturgy c. 1619-1629 — Westminster Directory — Nonjuring 
School of Theologians — John Johnson — Bishop Hickes — 
Nonjurors’ Liturgy — Bishop Thomas Brett— Bishop Dea- 
con's Liturgy and Catechisms — Bishop Rattray's Liturgy 
— bishop Archibald Campbell— Bishop Robert Forbes's 
Catechism — Bishop Seabury — Concordate with the Scottish 
Bishops— Rev. William Smith's Letter to Bishop Seabury 
— Bishop Seabury's Second Charge to his Clergy, and his 
Communion Office — Writes to Bishop White — General 
Convention adopts American Prayer of Consecration — 
Identity of Meaning of the Scottish and American Phrase- 
ology of The Invocation — Dr. William Smith supported 
Bishop Seabury in the General Convention of 1789 — Pro- 
posed Amendment of the English Invocation adopted by the 
Maryland and Pennsylvania State Conventions of 1786 — 
Bishop Seabury knew of, and appealed to, their Action — 
Bishop Seabury's published Sermon ** Of the Holy Eucha- 
rist" — An Introduction, etc., 1805 — Summary and Con- 
clusion. 


APPENDIX 


CONTAINING THE ORIGINAL LATIN AND GREEK TEXTS, AND 
OTHER ORIGINAL MATTER, REFERRED TO IN THE PRECED- 
ING CHAPTERS , s : : : : : : . 245 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  . " 8 ) 1 ; A Σ ^ . 487 


INDEX . : : a : : : : 5 ; : . 451 


THE CONSECRATION OF 
THE EUCHARIST 


CHAPTER I 
TEXT AND PHRASEOLOGY OF THE PRAYER OF CONSECRATION 


THE title and purpose of the prayer which is the sub- 
ject of this essay is given in the last clause of the rubric 
preceding: “When the Priest, standing before the Table, 
hath so ordered the Bread and Wine, that he may with the 
more readiness and decency break the Bread before the People, 
and take the Cup into his hands, he shall say the Prayer of 
Consecration, as followeth." + That its name and purport 
are so clearly stated in this place is due primarily to that 
great defender of the Church of England, Archbishop 
Laud. Writing to the Right Reverend James Wedder- 
burne, under date of April 20, 1636, in reference to the 
final preparations for the ill-fated Book of Common 
Prayer for Scotland, he says: “ Fifthly, I would have 
every prayer or other action through the whole Com- 
munion named in the rubric before it, that it may be known 
to the people what it is, as I have begun to do in the Prayer 
of Consecration, and in the Memorial, or Prayer of Obla- 
tion. Fac similiter."? This was a definite advance upon 
the earlier Books of 1549 and 1552, and upon the English 
Book then in use. In the First Book of Edward VI. 
there is found, after the salutation, “ Let us pray for the 
whole state of Christ’s Church,” a rubrie that reads: 
“Then the Priest, turning him to the Altar, shall say or sing, 
plainly and distinctly, this Prayer following." Under this 
caption was included apparently not only the prayer for 


ı Page 235, American Standard Book of Common Prayer, 1892. 
2 Laud’s Works, A.C.L., Vol. VI., p. 457. 
1 


2 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


the Whole State of Christ’s Church, but also the Invo- 
cation and the Narrative of Institution, as they followed 
without any further rubrical heading. Between the 
Narrative of Institution and the Prayer of Oblation fol- 
lowing, was inserted a rubric referring to the Narrative 
alone; 1.6., “These words before rehearsed are to be said, 
turning still to the Altar, without any elevation, or shewing 
the Sacrament to the people." In the Second Book of 
Edward VI., in the Book of 1559, and in the subsequent 
editions until the Book of 1662, the rubrie standing before 
the shortened Prayer of Consecration, read simply : 
“Then the Priest standing up, shall say as followeth." In 
the Scottish Book of 1637, however, in accordance with 
Archbishop Laud's suggestion to Bishop Wedderburne, 
the rubrie before the Invocation (and the Narrative of 
Institution, which followed this immediately) read thus: 
“Then the Presbyter standing up, shall say the prayer of 
consecration, as followeth. . . ." In the Book of 1662 the 
rubrie reads as quoted at the opening of this chapter, 
save that the words “ Prayer of Consecration" were not 
then marked out by Roman type as they are now in the 
American Standard Book of Common Prayer of 1892. 
In other words, we may reasonably infer that the prayer 
following this rubrie is called the Prayer of Consecration 
because its chief characteristic is an act of prayer to God 
the Father, asking Him to bless the offered elements of 
bread and wine, so that they may be the communion of 
the Body and Blood of Christ. 

The text of the Prayer of Consecration next demands 
our attention, in order that we may the more readily com- 
prehend its rationale and understand more clearly the 
relation of its parts one to the other. It opens with a 
brief ascription of praise, “ All glory be to thee, Almighty 
God," derived through Bishop Seabury's Communion 
Office of 1786, from the Scottish Communion Office of 
1764. "These words link the Prayer of Consecration closely 


THE PRAYER OF CONSECRATION 3 


to the Sanctus. In fact, they correspond to and epitomize 
the Post Sanctus of the Gallican (and Eastern) Liturgies, 
which is to be found at length in the Communion Office of 
the Nonjurors of 1718! and in Bishop Rattray’s “Office 
for the Sacrifice of the Holy Eucharist,” ete., of 1744? 
(from the Greek Liturgy of St. James). The prayer of 
humble access is misplaced in the American Liturgy, a 
dislocation taken over from the English Book, as properly 
it should precede immediately the actual reception of the 
Holy Communion. The continuity of the Prayer of Con- 
secration with the first part of the Anaphora, or Canon, 
would then be seen more clearly, as the note of praise 
and thanksgiving is caught up, and reéchoed in view 
of the redemptive sacrifice of the cross. For we must 
recall that the Canon Missae, like the Greek Anaphora, 
was more anciently understood to begin with the Sursum 
Corda, and thus to include the great act of thanksgiving 
for creation and for redemption, of which the Sanctus 
was the centre. Thus the Gelasian Sacramentary, the 
Missale Francorum, the Sacramentary of Gellona, and the 
Leofrie Missal, place the title, “ Incipit Canon Actionis," 
before the Sursum Corda; whereas Ordo Romanus I. 
puts the beginning of the Canon, as now, after the Sanctus, 
and before the prayer T'e igitur.? 

“All glory be to thee, Almighty God, our heavenly 
Father, for that thou, of thy tender mercy, didst give thine 
only Son Jesus Christ to suffer death upon the Cross for 
our redemption." The note of praise is taken up in honour 
of the redemptive sacrifice of the cross; which is first 
described as the act of God the Father, and then immedi- 
ately restated (in a relative clause) as the act of God the 


! See Appendix, p. 424. ? [bid., p. 428. 

3 Ebner, Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte . . . des 
Missale Romanum, ete., p. 395, note 3. Οἵ. Dictionnaire ď Arché- 
ologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie, article ANAPHORE, by Dom Cabrol, 
col. 1898 seg. 


4 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Son; “who made there (by his one oblation of himself 
once offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, obla- 
tion, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world." 
This statement first makes its appearance in the Book of 
1549, with the exception of the words “of himself" in 
the parenthesis, “by his one oblation of himself once 
offered," which were introduced in the Book of 1552. 
The moment of the cross is strongly emphasized, evidently 
with a view to preclude any notion of a repetition of the 
same. The theologians of the later Middle Ages -had 
come to regard the sacrifice of Christ as exclusively ex- 
pressed by His death upon the cross, and at the same time, 
popular opinion had asserted not only an independent 
propitiatory value for the Eucharistie sacrifice, but also 
a remactation of Christ therein.! The clause under con- 
sideration would seem to have been framed to meet this 
error, widely current in Cranmer’s day. It must there- 
fore be interpreted in its positive aspect only, as it would 
be most unreasonable to argue negatively therefrom 
against that primitive and truly Catholie teaching which 
sets the Eucharist, in its sacrificial aspect, in line with and 
over against the background of Christ's exercise of His 
eternal Melchizedek High-priesthood in the heavens? 
Moreover, the raison d'étre of the opening ascription of 
praise is not complete, until, in another relative clause, 
parallel to the last, 1s stated the fact that Christ instituted 
the Eucharistie memorial of His death: “and did insti- 
tute, and in his holy Gospel command us to continue, ἃ 
perpetual memory of that his precious death and sacrifice, 
until his coming again." Then follows in illustration and 
proof of this statement, the Narrative of the original 
Institution, introduced by the causal conjunction “ For." 
This narrative is virtually a quotation, following chiefly 
the Pauline account (1 Cor. xi., 23-25), but ‘combining 
1 Cf. Kidd, The Later Mediaeval Doctrine of the Eucharistic 
Sacrifice, pp. 24 seq. 2 Ibid., pp. 105-113. 


ΤΗΕ PRAYER OF CONSECRATION 5 


also details from the two accounts in the first and third 
gospels respectively (Matt. xxvi. 26-28; Luke xxii. 19, 
20). It cannot be too thoroughly understood, that this 
is purely an historical narrative, contained in a secondary 
clause, and that the plain laws of language do not permit 
anything else to be made of it. We are given simply 
a description of that original institution of the Eucharist, 
which is one of the ane reasons assigned for the opening 
ascription of praise.’ 

“For in the night in which he was betrayed, he took 
Bread; and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and 
gave it to his disciples, saying, Take, eat, this is my Body, 
which is given for you; Do this in remembrance of me. 
Likewise, after supper, he took the Cup; and when he 
had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink ye 
all of this; for this is my Blood of the New Testament, 
which is shed for you, and for many, for the remission of 
sins; Do this, as oft as ye shall drink it, in remembrance 
of me.” This narrative lacks the fuller detail of the older 
Liturgies, conforming more closely to the Scriptural ac- 
counts, and is noteworthy chiefly in two points. It 
contains the clause, “as oft as ye shall drink it,” which 
is not found in the older Liturgies; and it omits the words 
“he blessed it" after the words “and when he had given 
thanks.” In the Book of 1549 this last phrase was used 
of Christ’s action regarding the bread, but it was dropped 
even thence in the Book of 1552. The exact arrangement 
or combination of the four New Testament narratives 
was probably taken by Cranmer from the formula in the 
Brandenburg-Nürnberg Kirchen-Ordnung of 1533? The 


1 Cf. Chap. V., pp. 222-241, for the significance of the para- 
graph under consideration, in the eyes of those who brought 
about the adoption of our present American Prayer of Conse- 
cration. 

? See Jacobs, The Lutheran Movement in England, pp. 45-48; 
and Gasquet and Bishop, Edward VI. and the Book of Common 
Prayer, pp. 206-207, note 1, and Appendix, VI., pp. 444-448. 


6 THE ΟΟΝΡΕΟΒΑΤΙΟΝ OF THE EUCHARIST 


TABLE I 
THE NARRATIVE 


When the Priest, standing bejore the Table, hath so ordered the 
Bread and Wine, that he may with the more readiness and decency 
break the Bread bejore the People, and take the Cup into his hands, he 
shall say the Prayer of Consecration,' as followeth. 

All glory be to thee,? Almighty God, our heavenly Father, for 
that thou,? of thy tender mercy, didst give thine only Son Jesus 
Christ to suffer death upon the Cross for our redemption; who 
made there (by his one * oblation of himself once offered) a full, 
perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the 
- sins of the whole world; and did institute, and in his holy Gospel 
command us to continue, a perpetual memory of that his precious 
death and sacrifice, until his coming again: For in the night in 


which he was betrayed, (a) he took Bread; 
and when he had“ given thanks, (b) he 
brake it, and gave it to his disciples, say- 
ing, Take, eat, (c) this is my Body, which 
is given for you; Do this in remembrance 
of me. Likewise, after supper, (d) he 
took the Cup; and when he had given 
thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink 
ye all of this; for (e) this is my Blood of 
the New Testament, which is shed for 
you, and for many, for the remission of 
sins; Do this, as oft as ye shall drink it, 
in remembrance of me. 


1549 
7 Here the Priest must take the 
bread into his hands. 


(a) Here the Priest is 
to take the Paten into 
his hands." 

(b) And here to break 
the Bread. 

(ο) And here to lay 
his hand upon all the 
Bread." 

(d) Here he is to take 
the Cup into his hands.'® 

(e) And here he is to 
lay his hand upon every 
vessel 1! in which there 
is any Wine 13 to be con- 
secrated. 


1637 Se. 


7 At these words (took bread) 
the Presbyter that officiates is to 


take the Paten in his hand. 


19 Here the Priest shall take the 
cup into his hands. 


19 At these words (took the cup) 
he is to take the chalice in his hand, 


Hand lay his hand upon so 
much, be it in chalice or flagons, 
as he intends to consecrate. 

1 The title “ Prayer of Consecration " first appears in 1637 Sc. 
2 ** All glory be to thee,” 1786 Sea. from 1764 Sc. 
3 “for that thou," required by the introduction of “ All glory be to 


ΤΗΕ PRAYER OF CONSECRATION 7 


more than close parallel between them, taken in connection 
with Cranmer’s visits to Nürnberg in 1532, during which 
year this particular Kirchen-Ordnung was prepared, and 
the fact that Cranmer met and married the niece of 
Osiander, one of the two collaborators thereof, would 
seem to be decisive. 

We next observe that the recital of this narrative is 
accompanied and embellished by five mimetic gestures,! 
which serve to constitute it a solemn rehearsal before God 
the Father, of Christ’s acts and words at His institution 
of the Eucharist. In the Book of 1549 we find the elab- 
orate rubries of the Sarum (and other English Uses) 
swept away. Two brief directions only: “Here the 
Priest must take the bread into his hands;" and “ Here 
the Priest shall take the cup into his hands;" are to be 
found in the margin of the Narrative of Institution, and 
the Narrative is followed by the direction: “ These words 
before rehearsed are to be said, turning still to the Altar, 
without any elevation, or shewing the Sacrament to the 
people." All such directions are absent from the Book 


! See Table I. 


thee," first in 1764 Sc. (' which" 1549, 1552, 1637 Sc., “who” 
1662). 

* one," the constant reading from 1549 on, except 1764 Sc. “ own.” 

5 “and sacrifice," first appears in 1637 Sc. 

©“ blessed, and ” are inserted between “had” and “given” in 1549, 
but omitted in all since, 1718 Nj. included. 

8'This rubric first appears in 1662. 

? “hands,” 1764 Sc., 1786 Sea. ; “hand " 1662, 1718 Nj. 

19 "hand," 1662 Sealed Books, 1764 Se., 1786 Sea.; “ hands" 1662 
MS., 1718 Nj. 

" Bp. Rattray 1744 and 1786 Proposed Book omitted “ be it Chalice 
or Flagon.” 

21718 Nj. adds “and water.” 

Note that the Nonjurors’ Liturgy of 1718 has also directions for the 
Priest to lay his hand upon the bread, and upon any vessel in which there 
is wine and water, during T'he Invocation. See Appendix, page 426 ; and 
cf. also Bishop Rattray's Liturgy of 1744, page 430, which has the same 
directions. 


ὃ THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


of 1552, and none reappear till the Book of 1662.' The 
Scottish Book of 1637, however, had reintroduced the 
two marginal rubrics of 1549 with slight verbal differences, 
and had added a direction to lay the hand upon any 
vessel containing wine to be consecrated. In the Book of 
1662 these are inserted together with the addition of a 
direction for the priest to break the bread, and also to 
lay his hand upon it. The last marginal rubrie in our 
American Book is the only one that calls for particular 
notice at present: “ And here he is to lay his hand upon 
every vessel in which there is any Wine to be consecrated." 
In view of the rubrical title, “Prayer of Consecration," 
and of the rubric that governs a second consecration, and, 
above all, of the fact that no prayer for God to consecrate 
the elements will be made until The Invocation, it is 
evident that “to be consecrated" refers to the (as yet) 
future hallowing of the bread and wine by God in response 
to our prayer to that end in The Invocation? 

These gestures in the Narrative of Institution have no 
other original significance than as mimetic or illustrative, 
in any Liturgy. Even the gestures now practised during 
the recital of the Narrative “Qui pridie" in the Roman 
Canon Missae are, in their ultimate analysis, no real ex- 
ception to this statement, as they have grown to their 
present complexity and altered character as the result 

! That they were in common use, however, appears, e.g., from 
Archbishop Laud's letter, to which reference has been made. 
Works, A.C.L., Vol. VI., p. 458. Cf. Bishop Cosin's Notes, Works, 
A.C.L., Vol. V., p. 340. 

2 It is also to be remembered that this rubrie is found in the 
Nonjurors’ Liturgy of 1718, in Bishop Rattray’s of 1744, in the Scot- 
tish Book of 1764, and in Bishop Seabury’s Communion Office of 
1786. Itis absolutely certain therefore that its phrase “ to be con- 
secrated” cannot possibly be fairly pressed into the service of the 
theory which strives to force the Roman notion of consecration upon 
our American Prayer of Consecration. If this phrase had been sup- 


posed to negative the amendments made in 1789, it would have been 
altered, as was the rubric for a second consecration of elements. 


THE PRAYER OF CONSECRATION 9 


of exaggeration, and of a gradual misunderstanding of 
their significance, that arose in the eleventh and twelfth 
centuries, and reached its full development in the sixteenth 
century, only. Of this development we shall treat later.! 

Thus the first paragraph of our Prayer of Consecration 
is seen to be a giving of thanks and praise toGod the Father 
for the death of His Son upon the cross, considered as the 
loving act both of the Father and of the Son; and for the 
commemorative sacrifice instituted by Christ, whose 
acts, (1) “thanksgiving," “blessing”; statements (2), 
“This is my Body,” etc.; and commands (3), “Take, 
eat," “Drink ye all,” etc., “Do this," etc., we solemnly 
rehearse as a preamble to our complete observance of the 
requirements of that our Charter, Warrant, and Com- 
mission, as once for all originally spoken by Him. Part 
of His command we have already obeyed in the Preface 
and Sanctus, i.e. thanksgiving; and now having read over 
our Charter, the commemorative sacrifice is forthwith to 
be made, i.e. the elements are to be offered in Christ’s 
memorial; and after that again, they are to be hallowed 
and sanctified by the Holy Spirit of God. 

The second paragraph of the Prayer of Consecration 
therefore next claims our attention. It marks a return 
to present time, 1.6. an act now made by us before God; and 
in it not only do we declare our obedience to Christ’s 
command (“ Do this,” ete.), which command we have just 
rehearsed, but we actually carry out and accomplish that 
obedience to that one special definite command. 

“Wherefore, O Lord and heavenly Father, according 
to the institution of thy dearly beloved Son our Saviour 
Jesus Christ.” We declare that we are acting in accord- 
ance with that original institution, just recited, and then 
‘at once we go on to make the Christ-ordained memorial 
before God the Father, by means of the antitypical bread 


1 See Chap. IV., pp. 146-174. Cf. Scudamore, Notitia Eucharis- 
tica, second edition, London, 1876, pp. 602-607; 616-620. 


10 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


and wine (now regarded as “ holy,” 1.6. as already set apart 
and placed upon the Holy Table at the Offertory for this 
high use), the memorial of the work and sacrifice of His 
Incarnate Son: “we, thy humble servants, do celebrate 
and make here before thy Divine Majesty, with these thy 
holy gifts, which we now offer unto thee, the memorial 
thy Son hath commanded us to make." The text! of 
this part of the Prayer of Consecration is taken from 
Bishop Seabury’s Communion Office of 1786 and the Scot- 
tish Communion Office of 1764; which derived it from the 
Book of 1637 forScotland (and this equals, almost verbatim, 
that in the Book of 1549), with the addition of the phrase 
“which we now offer unto thee," after the words, “ these 
thy holy gifts;" and with the change of “willed” into 
"commanded." The addition of the words, * which we 
now offer unto thee," ? brings out and emphasizes the 
actual present accomplishment .of our obedience and the 
objective character thereof. For the idea of a memorial, 
in its completeness, involves four things: — 

(1) The person (or persons) making (or causing to be 
made) the memorial. 

(2) The person (or thing) intended to be remembered. 

(3) The person (or persons) memorialized, 7.e. the one 
(or ones) whom it is desired to provoke to a memory of (2). 

(4) The means (or thing) employed by (1) to recall 
(2) to the mind of (3). 

All these are found clearly marked in this act of ours as 
expressed in this (second) paragraph of the Prayer of Con- 
secration. Christ gave command to do (ποιεῖν) His memorial. 
It involves of necessity: — 

(1) Those who make the memorial, 1.6. the Christian 
Church, through and with its representative priesthood. 

! See Table II on opposite page. 

? [bid., col. 2, note 2. "These words were printed in small capi- 
tals in the editions of the B.C.P. of 1790 and 1791, after the man- 


ner of Bishop Seabury's Communion Office of 1786, and the Scot- 
tish Office of 1764. This was given up in all subsequent editions. 


THE PRAYER OF CONSECRATION 


11 


(2) The Person to be called to mind, Christ. 

(3) The Person memorialized, God the Father, who is 
besought to look upon the offering of His dear Son. 

(4) The means employed by us (1) to call Christ's 
(2) work to His Father's (3) mind; 7.e. the bread and 
wine offered in this, T'he Oblation. 

This paragraph then closes with the expression of the 
subjective aspect of the offering, i.e. the frame of mind 


TABLE II 
THE OBLATION 


1 

Text of 1549 with variants of 
1637 Se.! 

Wherefore, O Lord and hea- 
venly father, according to the 
Institution of thy dearly be- 
loved Son, our Saviour Jesu ? 
Christ, we thy humble servants 
do celebrate and make here be- 
fore thy divine Majesty, with 
these thy holy gifts, the memo- 
rial which thy Son hath willed 
us to make, having in remem- 
brance his blessed passion, 
mighty resurrection, and glori- 
ous ascension, rendering unto 
thee most hearty thanks, for the 
innumerable benefits procured 
unto us by the same. 


11637 Se. Title in rubrie preced- 
ing, “this memorial or prayer of 
oblation." 

2 1637 Sc. “Jesus.” 


2 

Text of 1786 Sea. with vari- 
ants of 1789-1892! American. 

Wherefore, Ὁ Lord, and 
heavenly Father, according to 
the institution of thy dearly be- 
loved Son our Saviour Jesus 
Christ, we thy humble servants 
do celebrate and make here be- 
fore thy divine majesty, with 
these thy holy gifts, “ WHICH WE 
NOW OFFER UNTO THEE, the 
memorial thy Son hath com- 
manded us to make; having in 
remembrance his blessed pas- 
sion, $and precious death,’ his 
mighty resurrection, and glori- 
ous ascension; rendering unto 
thee most hearty thanks for the 
innumerable benefits procured 
unto us by the same. 


1 Title indented in 1764 Se., 
1786 Sea., and in Amer. 1789— 
1892, T'he Oblation. 

22 From 1735 edition of 1637 
Sc. Capitals not used in Amer. 
B. C. P. since first editions of 1790 
and 1791, and reimpressions of the 
same. : 

33 First added in 1764 Sc. 


12 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


of those engaged in the solemn ordained memorial: 
declaring not only our due recollection of all that the 
Lord Christ has done for-us, by His death, His resurrec- 
tion and His ascension, but also our gratitude for the good 
that has acerued to us therefrom: “having in remem- 
brance his blessed passion and precious death, his mighty 
resurrection and glorious ascension; rendering unto thee 
most hearty thanks for the innumerable benefits procured 
unto us by the same." Ίο should note in passing that the 
position of this clause, standing as it does in our Liturgy, 
at the end of this paragraph, while in the older Liturgies 
it comes at the beginning, is without any particular sig- 
nificance. Cranmer transposed it in 1549 apparently in 
order to conform more closely to the genius of the English 
language. We should also note more particularly, that 
this paragraph being in substance derived from the older 
Latin (Unde et memores), takes within its scope not merely 
Christ's death, but also His triumph and His glorification. 
In this respect The Oblation conforms to the earlier (and 
Scriptural) notion of Christ's work of redemption, and 
does not bear the marks of the controversies of the sixteenth 
century, as do the opening clauses of the first paragraph of 
our Prayer of Consecration, which emphasize solely the 
fact of Christ's death. The title of this paragraph, we 
also note, is indented into it: The Oblation. This is taken 
from Bishop Seabury's Communion Office of 1786 (from 
the Seottish Office of 1764), and marks very clearly the 
significance of this (second) paragraph of the Prayer of 
Consecration. This act is THE OBLATION par excellence of 
the bread and wine. "There is a preliminary oblation in the 
setting of the elements upon the credence table, so that 
they may be ready for use in the Liturgy. There is again 
the presentation of (a part at least of) this bread and wine 
at the Offertory to be used in the memorial sacrifice. And 
finally there is the actual memorial itself made with the 
antitypes of bread and wine, in this The Oblation. The 


THE PRAYER OF CONSECRATION 13 


essential element on man's part, in all sacrifice (sacrum + 
facere) 1 is dedication, and this is fulfilled as our act in 
The Oblation. 

Next follows the third paragraph of our Prayer of Con- 
secration, designated by its own indented title, The 
Invocation. It is elosely connected with The Oblation as 
its corollary and complement. The early Church regarded 
the consecration as the act of God in answer to the prayer 
of the Church for that end. We Christians do our part, 
i.e. we make Christ"s solemn memorial offering with the 
symbols of bread and wine. Forthwith we pray (in The 
Invocation) God to do His part, and He accepts our mate- 
rial oblation, and glorifies and hallows it to be the Body 
and Blood of His dear Son. So close indeed is the relation 
of these two acts (1.6. of oblation and invocation), that 
Mr. Brightman, in his Liturgies Eastern and Western, 
vol. i.? puts the two under the one title of “ The Invoca- 
tion." For our offering is a virtual, and our petition for 
conseeration the actual, invocation of God's blessing upon 
the bread and wine. 

The Invocation opens with lowly request to be heard of 
God in respect of our petition that we are about to make, 
* And we most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to 
hear us." This expression of humility (accompanied by a 
profound bow, or inclination) is, as. we shall see, the 
characteristic opening of the Epiklesis in all Liturgies. 
We then proceed (basing our request upon His goodness 
and mercy) to ask God the Father to hallow the elements 
of bread and wine (that have just now been offered to 
Him in the Oblation), through the instrumentality of the 
Second and Third Persons of the Most Holy Trinity, so 
that it will be possible through the reception of the out- 


! Cf. the definition of ''sacrifice" given by S. Isidore of Seville. 
See p. 80 below, and for the Latin, Appendix, p. 283. 

? Eg. pp. 20, 52, 87, 133, 178, 190, 233, 287, 328, 386, and 
437. 


14 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ward “signs" to receive “verily and indeed," because 


* spiritually," the Body and Blood of Christ: “ and, of thy 
almighty goodness, vouchsafe to bless and sanctify, with 
thy Word and Holy Spirit, these thy gifts and creatures of 
bread and wine; that we, receiving them according to thy 
Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy institution, in remem- 
brance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his 
most blessed Body and Blood." We should note that the 
text ' of the Invocation is taken from Bishop Seabury’s 
Communion Office of 1786, with a difference in the con- 
cluding half only. The Book of 1637 for Scotland had 
added to the form of 1549 the final clauses of the weak 
Epiklesis of 1552.” This somewhat clumsy formula was 
shortened in one way by the Scottish Book of 1764 (fol- 
lowed by Bishop Seabury)? and in another way by the 
American revisers of 1789; * who followed very closely, 
whether wittingly or not cannot now be said, a form sub- 
mitted (in Sancroft’s handwriting) to a Committee of 
Convocation in the course of the revision of 1661-1662. 
We should also note the obvious force and meaning of the 
phraseology employed in our American form of the Invo- 
cation. God the Father is plainly asked to “bless and 
sanctify” His own “gifts and creatures of bread and 
wine" to what end? “That,” 1.6. to the purpose and end 
that,“ we, receiving them," 2.e.theelements that have been 
consecrated by Him, may be ?pso facto partakers of Christ's 
“ most blessed Body and Blood." ® 


! See Table III., 7. ? See Table III., 3. 

$ See Table III., 5. 

* Scudamore, Notitia Eucharistica, second edition, London, 
1876, p. 588, comparing the American form of The Invocation 
with that of the Book of 1637, says: “The American resembles 
the Scotch, but omits the words “that they may be unto us the 
Body and Blood of Thy most dearly beloved Son’; which are 
indeed unnecessary, as the same thing is expressed in the next 
clause which it retains; viz. “that we receiving them,’ ete." 

5 See Table III., 4. 6 See Chap. V., pp. 231-233. 


15 


THE PRAYER OF CONSECRATION 


ῬΟΟΙΗ pur Apog 
p9sso[q 3sour STU JO saos? 
-ıed oq Au *uorssed puv 
ueap sty JO oouuiquioui 
-οα ur 'uornjnsur Áqpoq 
S,]SLIIQ)) Snsof αποιλος 
ino πος AY} 04 Surp1099€ 
way} στλίουοά ‘om 481} 

» 


*ourM PUB peolg 
Jo soanyeam pue syn 
AU) 9591} '3rrrdg ΑΙΟΗ pur 
PIOM Áu3 YQIM 'Ajroues 
pue 55916 04 ogesuonoA 
‘ssoupoos Ayystuye Απ] Jo 
“pue ‘sn Ivey 01 “ποιο 
mpmıau () 9941 qooosoq 
Ajquiny Ίδοαι 9M puy 


UEOLISUIY ζθ051-θ6511Ι 
L 


"POCTE. PU Apog 
Ροββο[α 3s0ur STU JO 51.958} 
-αῦα oq Ávur *uorssud pue 
qjvop STU JO oouuwrquiour 
-9I ur 'uonnjnsur AJoy 
S,JSIIUY) Ssnsof  inorAeg 
imo uog Απ] ο) Surpi0oog 
way} SUulAI9991 OM 4817 


*ourA pur pwaıq 

Jo somyeam Ay) 9591} 

Ay 

-DUBS PUR 55916, 01 OS 9185 

-UPNOA ssoupoos KIYZTUJE 

Ay} Jo puv ‘99y} quooosoq 

Aıquuny 9sou 9A ποιο] 
mpeou ο Sn MWH 


"ed PUE "PW 9821 
9 


Ῥοοια put 


"uog poAo[oq Á[reop 
jsour Ay} JO poojg pue 
Apoq oy} ouroooq wur 
Kou yeyg fourm pu peolg 
Jo soinjeolo pue 521 
Au} 9591} “τάς Apogp pue 
Piom Aug ΤΑ. 'ÁAjrouws 
pue sso[q ο) ogesqonoA 
ssoupoos Ayysıup ἀπ 
Jo pus ‘sn way 03 “19118 7 
mau () “9911 quooosoq 
Arqumy Ίβο 9M puy 


"wog 9821 “9S FOLT 
g 


poorg 

pu* Apog posso[q sour sty 
jo siox-vj1ed oq Áwvur 'uors 
-Swq pue τῃσο STU u310] 
MOUS 04 pur *urrq jo oouv1q 
-urjuioq[ ur '*uorjnjrsug 
ATOY SISLIUJ Snsof 1norAug 
Ino uog απ ο) Surp1iooou 
πποι} «πΙλίουοα. 9M 481} 


‘Our PUB PBoIg Jo soin; 
-Lo17) pu* SI) Απ 9591} 
ÁKJrj»uss puv sso[q 04 9185 
-yonoa τάς pue pioA, 
Ajoy Απ] Jo 1940q SY) Aq 


pue f9941 qgooosoq 
ÁK[qumq jsour om *'1oqjuq 
mau () ‘sn απο 


qyorourg [99T 
v 


£pog snorted 3sour sty sures ayy Jo 
ssoyeyied oq Avut 'uorssed pue 
Qq399p STY Jo voURIqUIOUIeI ur *uon 
-njnsut Á[OW S,JSLIUJ snsof 1notAuvg 
Ino uog Ay} 0} 3urpiooov U9UJ 
ΦΠΤΑΙΟΟΟΙ 9M 7811 OS 'uog poAo[oq 
Á[reop 3s0ur Ay} Jo poo[q puw £pog 
οὗ} SN oyun oq Avur AS) 181} 9UIM 
pu? pesıq jo soinjvodio pu $3Jr3 
Ay} οδού} 11dg Ajoy puv pıom 
Ay} ya Ájrouvws puw sso[q 0} os 
ΘΙΕΕΠΟΠΟΑ ssoupoos Ájusru[e ΑἹ 
Jo pur “9941 gooosoq [quinq ysour 
94 '19gj]e4 Tnpaasu ( ‘sn 89H 


08 LEST 
5 


'poo[q puv £pog possojg 
jsour STU JO SISNYEJIEd oq Avur *uors 


-sed pus qjvop sty jo oouuiquiourod 
ur fuonnjnsur ATOY S,ISIUJ nsof 
INOIABY ino uog AY} ο) Surpiooou 
‘QUIM pue Ῥτοια JO so1njeo1o Απ 
9591} ZUIAI909I 9A 2811 JUBIS pue 


“9941 qooosoq 
aM '19q)9] [njro19ur () ‘sn ivo] 


6461 
σ 


NOLLVOOANI FHL 
III WISVIL 


"JSTIU) snsof- uoq 
peAo[pq Á[preop ysour Απ] JO poo[q 
put Ápoq 91 sn oyun oq £eur Aou 
yey} ‘ulm PU“ puvoIq JO so1injuvolo 
pue “syr Ay 9591} Ayıy>fours puu 
Sso»I«q ΟἹ ojyesuonoa ‘plo puo yids 
Kou Ay} YUJIM puv 19941 qooosoq 
ΘΑ (JOYE [njaasu ()) sn απο 


6FST 
T 


16 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


No sophistry can make this out to-be a mere prayer for 
the worthy reception of elements supposed to be already 
consecrated by the reading of the Narrative of Institution. 
The Invocation in our American Book of Common Prayer 
is unmistakable in its meaning. It is an heritage of 
which to be proud, incapable of being explained away 
in the interests of Romanensian teaching in our Church. 
Moreover we should note, that these paragraphs which we 
have had under consideration (the Narrative, the Oblation, 
and the Invocation) make up the “ Form" of consecration 
in accordance with the rubrie governing a second conse- 
cration ! of more bread and wine, if the species first con- 
secrated do not suffice for all the communicants. “If the 
consecrated Bread or Wine be spent before all have com- 


! See p. 237, American Standard Book of Common Prayer, 
1892. Cf.the various provisions in Table IV. 

Note also that while on the one hand the Order of Communion 
(1548) followed the customary late medisxval notion of consecra- 
tion, and that this same notion was embodied in the canon of 1603, 
in the rubrie in the Book of 1637 for Scotland, and in the present 
English Book of Common Prayer of 1662, yet on the other hand, 
the rubric in the Scottish Communion Office of 1764 (followed 
verbatim by Bishop Seabury's Communion Office of 1786) and in 
the American Book, 1789-1892, marks an unmistakable return 
to primitive tradition in this matter. 

Cf. also the third rubrie after the Gospel in the Order for the 
Communion of the Sick (added in 1892), which provides: “In the 
times of contagious sickness or disease, or when extreme weakness 
renders it expedient, the following form shall suffice: The Con- 
fession and the Absolution; Lift up your hearts, etc., through the 
Sanctus; The Prayer of Consecration, ending with these words, 
partakers of his most blessed Body and Blood: the Communion; the 
Lord’s Prayer; The Blessing.” Page 293, American Standard 
B. Ο. P., 1892. The same unalterable minimum is here required 
as in the rubric for a second consecration. The mind of the 
American Church was the same in 1892 as in 1789. 

It is obvious that the fourth paragraph of the Prayer of Conse- 
cration, following The Invocation, being non-essential to the in- 
tegrity of the act of consecration, does not come within the scope 
of this essay. 


T 


THE PRAYER OF CONSECRATION 


: pool 
pun lipog possojq 1sow sv [o 5.100} 
-/0d 'spiOM 9591} Um Surpuo 
pus ‘poy finBuu] y ‘aay, οἱ aq fi10]b 
NY ‘Ye Suruurdoq :poqriso1d 9101 
-9q UNO oY} ο) Surpiooov€ 'olour 
9ju1098SUO9 0) SI JSALIJ oY} 'pojuvo 
-IUNUIUIOD ολο Πο 910Joq 3uods oq 
9UI AA 10 pvolg poju1oosuoo 91} JI 


ueorLijuy cC68I—684I 
9 


"οφ ‘4007 'pofinaQ 
-θ son ay 701 Ίθιι 2] ur «ποῖα 
-Ός απο) UOoreID9suo9 jo J94vid 
ου} ur spio« οπου} Ye Suruuis 
-9q JajAqselg 94} :9ur« IO peolg 
194)19 ‘alow ολο ‘urese pojeod 
-91 9g Á*vur UOINBIIISUOI JO SPIOM 
oy} ‘Juem oq 9191} Jr uoq pue *3suo[ 
94) UJIM © 938109s109 0) ponmb 
-91 ST sojvrongo 4281 oy “2291 opm 
9g ABUL 9194) puo SY) ο) puy 


5 ZEIT 
£ 


"ορ 9821 “ISON 1 

"uos poaojoq Ajuvop Ίνοιι fy) [o pooja 
puo fipog ay} οιµοῦος how [οι] 101] 
SPIOM oY} YJIM Zupus pue 0» 
‘3947 ο) 99 fi.0]b NY “SPIOM ou Ye 
Zuruumog '(poqruiosoid o10Joq ULIOJ 
oy} 0} Surplooo€ “91011 9YEIIISUOD 
04 SI τ 1994gso1J 911 'pojeorunur 
-U109 9AĽY [18 910]9q 3uods [je oq 
ΘΠΠΑΑ IO Ῥθοια pojeroesuoo dif} JI 


"vog 9821 “9S FOLT 
4 


"oTIE ]-uorunuruio;) 91} 
uodn 3u9s01d oq oura, pue pRolg 
pres oy} USYM 'posreoqor oq [[eus 
uonnjnsu] JO SpIoA 90} 3e1g 41G 
“posn oq [eus JUZNOIJ A[MOU ο] ΛΛ. 
10 pvolg ou "0101119 JMY ^ ^ * 

€09I XX ποασΏ 
σ 


NOILVYADASNOD GNODYAS V ONINAGAOD SIIAALNA 


AI WIdVL 


‘dng eu jo 3ursso[q oy} 1ο] [ 29 p zad 
-dns' 401/0 os1n9yv7] ye puw !pwaagg 
oy} JO Sursso[q oy} 101 [3p 'nuybiu 
aus οἱ] ur Ίδια «ποιαῦς απο] 
ye Suruurdoqp :poqrosoIld 910704 
110} 911} 01 SUIPIODOV 910W 998.19 
-9SU09 0) SI 259114 oy} !payearunuı 
-ui00 JAVY [fe 910joq 3uods fe aq 
9UIA 10 ΡῦοΙς[ pojv1oosuoo ou) JI 


6991 
Ῥ 


‘dn Suri 10 ποῃ ολο ΑΒ JNOYJIM 
pue -n40j0999d  12uowssuuol Ur 
4njopun[[2 sıynw oid ya sıgoa oud inf) 
“SPIOM 9591} Ye Surpuo pue 759 wm] 
-θιιωο wonbgsod opow avus ‘SPIOM 
9591} 28. Suruurgoq '9SLMO9XI[ 9JIOUI 
10 ply) oy} os pur '1ogjoue 9180 
-9suoo puwe oivdoid Á[jnoAop pue 
ÁKp[juo19Ao1 pue 'iej[y οὗ} ο) urede 
03 Avur '*porjduro oq oor[eq;) 10 dng 
jsig oy} 193je 'jsorigp 911 'uorunuir 
“ιο ου 915] op FEY} Woy} 10} 
usnouo oq 10 002 UJNS JOU q30p poo 
-9suoo PUB poAo[[eq 9UTAA 911} 281} 
9ouuqo OS UJCOP 31 JI 1 ΠῚ, “ALON 

uorunuiulo?) 91} JO 19p1() 911, “SPST 

I 


10 SNOILY TODAY 


15 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


municated, the Priest is to consecrate more, according to 
the Form before prescribed; beginning at, All glory be to 
thee, Almighty God, and ending with these words, par- 
takers of his most blessed Body and Blood." The word 
“form" is, of course, not used in the restrictive sense com- 
mon in medizval and modern Latin theology, but as em- 
bracing the minimum required by an exact obedience to 
Christ’s command. In other words, the consecration of 
the Holy Eucharist is not regarded by the American 
Church as accomplished by the mere recital of the Nar- 
rative of the original Institution, but after that has been 
rehearsed as containing the warrant for our observance of 
the rite, solemn memorial to God is made of Christ our 
Sacrifice, with the material elements ordained by Him, 
and then, the Divine Mercy is invoked to make, through 
the operation of the Word and the Holy Spirit, these 
"gifts and creatures of bread and wine," to be the com- 
munion of the Body and Blood of Christ. In other words 
this consecration is the act of God in response to our prayer 
therefor, and The Invocation is the consummation and 
crown of our solemn act of obedience to Christ’s command — 
The PRAYER OF CONSECRATION par excellence.’ 

! Cf. Tracts for the Times, Tract 63, [by R. H. Froude] The 
Antiquity of the Existing Liturgies, p. 7. “It appears from Mr. 
Palmer’s valuable work, that all the ancient Liturgies now exist- 
ing, or which can be proved ever to have existed, resemble one 
another in the following points:— . . . (6) Also a commemora- 
tion of our Lord’s words and actions in the institution of the 
Eucharist, which is the same, almost word for word, in every 
Liturgy, but is not taken from any of the four Scripture accounts. 
(7) A sacrificial oblation of the Eucharistic bread and wine. 


(8) A prayer of consecration, that God will ‘make the bread and 
wine the Body and Blood of Christ.’” 


N.B. (1) The title “prayer of consecration " is given specifically 
to the Invocation. (2) In the parallel tables the Invocation is 
called ‘‘Consecration prayer" (once simply “Conseeration"). 
(3) The Narrative of Institution is invariably called “Com- 
memoration of our Lord’s words.” 


CHAPTER II 


THE RATIONALE OF EUCHARISTIC CONSECRATION IN THE 
NEW TESTAMENT 


WE must now examine the New Testament writings, and 
ascertain what rationale of Eucharistie consecration is 
outlined therein, in order that we may obtain a criterion, 
original, Apostolie, inspired, whereby to test that ratio- 
nale of Eucharistie observance to which our American 
Church stands pledged, liturgically, historically, and gram- 
matically, in the Prayer of Consecration in her Com- 
munion Office. 

It is obvious that our attention must be directed pri- 
marily to the four separate narratives which describe the 
Lord Christ’s original institution of the Eucharist; and 
afterward to such other hints or suggestions as may be 
afforded elsewhere in the New Testament. 

Before we begin our examination of these narratives, 
however, we are obliged to look into the text of the pas- 
sages under consideration. Fortunately, the text of three 
of these accounts cannot be called into question in any 
large degree. The narratives of S. Mark (xiv. 22-25), of 
S. Matthew (xxvi. 26-29), and of S. Paul (1. Cor. xi. 23-26), 
after undergoing most careful textual serutiny, have not 
been deemed by scholars to need much correction from the 
commonly received text, save in the dropping of a word or 
two from each, that may easily have crept in through the 
influence of the details of each aecount upon the mind of 
the copyist, disposing him, all unconsciously, to assimilate 
one to the other. But in the case of S. Luke's account, 

19 


20 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


inasmuch as Westcott and Hort saw fit to enelose in 
double brackets part of verse 19 and the whole of verse 20, 
and vigorously to attack their genuineness,! and as the 
opinion of these distinguished scholars has influenced 
many during the last twenty years, it seems necessary to 
state briefly why their conclusions have not been accepted 
by the writer of this handbook. In the first place, the 
burden of proof must rest upon those who, like Westcott 
and Hort, would impugn the genuineness of this verse and 
a half, in view of the overwhelming evidence in their fa- 
vour.” In the second place the omission of 19b, 20 is 


! In the Appendix to the Introduction to their text of the New 
Testament, pp. 63-64, New York, 1882. 

? All the known Greek MSS. (except the bi-lingual D), all the 
Versions (except those mentioned hereafter), the Old Latin MSS. 
ef q; the Vulgate; Tertullian, Against Marcion, IV. 40: the Canons 
of Eusebius; the Ethics ascribed to Basil; and Cyril of Alexan- 
dria, Commentary on S. Luke; — all this goodly army of witnesses 
read the text of S. Luke (xxii. 14-20), as given in column three of 
Table V., pp. 22-23. 

Verses 195, 20 are omitted by one Greek MS. only, D; and by 
the Old Latin d, a, fP, i, 1; b and e omit and also transpose verses 
17, 18, placing them after 19a. 

Verses 16, 17, 18 are omitted by the Coptic; and verses 17, 18 
by the MSS. of the Peshitto, and by Lectionary 32. 

The Curetonian and Sinaitie Syriac transpose verses 17 and 18 
and place them after 19 (which they retain entire); the Sinaitic also 
combines 20 (in part) with 17. 

These variants may be studied best in the tabular form into 
which the Rev. W. B. Frankland has cast them, pp. 114-115 of 
his work, The Early Eucharist, London, 1902. The Rev. J. C. 
Lambert in Vol. IV. of The Journal of Theological Studies, pp. 187— 
188 gives an excellent summing up of the case for the authenticity 
of verses 19b and 20, with references to the opinions of a large 
number of scholars of different schools of thought, and of divers 
nationalities, nearly all of whom support the Textus Receptus. Cf. 
the dictum of a recent French writer: ''Les versets suspects se 
trouvent conservés dans tous les manuscrits grecs existants; et le 
Codex Bezae n'est pas une exception, qui présente un grec mani- 
festement calqué sur la traduction latine. Cette unanimité a 


THE NEW TESTAMENT RATIONALE 2] 


easily accounted for by the possibility that the scribe, 
not comprehending the distinetion, marked so clearly by 
S. Luke, between the Passover and the Eucharist, would 
take out of the text what appeared to him to be a redun- 
daney. Similar motives may have prompted the omission 
of verses 16-18 in the Coptie, and verses 17-18 in the 
Peshitto. The readings of the old Latin, and of the Cure- 
tonian and of the Sinaitie Syriac, respectively, present 
other attempts either to correct the supposed redundancy, 
or to supply the defect of a text that was before the copyist 
or translator, a text similar to that of Codex Bezae. The 
various readings of S. Luke (xxii. 14-20). are surely most 
easily explained upon the hypothesis of an early attempt 
(or attempts) to conform the text thereof to that of S. 
Matthew and of S. Mark, as the result of not appreciating 
that S. Luke describes, in order, two distinct things, the 
last Passover and the first Eucharist. The varying de- 
vices employed by different copyists or translators to 
remedy the supposed redundancy, served but to bring in 
a real confusion that had no previous existence. A quiet 
study of these variants, bearing in mind S. Luke's own 
statement at the beginning of his gospel, ought to be 
sufficient to set at rest any doubts one may have felt (under 
the spell cast by the great names of Westcott and Hort) of 
the genuineness of xxii. 19b, 20, and to cause one to re- 
gard S. Luke's account of Christ's last Passover and of 
His institution of the Eucharist (verses 14-20) as a legacy 


paru aux meilleurs savants une preuve suffisante: si Wescott et 
Hort mettent encore le texte entre crochets, Gebhardt et Nestle le 
conservent sans contestation. L'omission de ces deux versets 
reste ‘un accident’ de l’antique tradition latine et syriaque. 

“ Mais leur authenticité est certaine: on ne peut les enlever à 
saint Luc qu'en donnant raison à un groupe restreint de manuscrits 
contre l'unanimité des autres. Un tel procédé n'est plus de la 
critique, mais de ľarbitraire." 

Le Dogme de la Rédemption, par l'Abbé J. Rivičre, Paris, 1905, 
pack 


THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


22 


nano o lo o č ne 


0139793001, Ü 11304 
ἃν a3 σπορ], soday 0, 


"ÚgNA 4090 QoL vjox 
-100g U go sm2 nox2ump sl. 
sozvnlasA noL'Qup ana noL 
eup mu Url no ama do, 4 9N. 


. $00,003 
$13 31009d>311019 ἸῸΝ OLNOL 
9196)ΏΥ „13113 5ος 16 


-ΏχΧῃ9 aorduLou soaarlp33g ἸῸΝ 


12030) 
ao. davon Ü az ρωσίωγιν 
nolg 503 0100 mApý Um 
no 143X90 119 ala dpA mA 


„113901 90] NOL 
odu amrla gan ar3kop vXopu 
QL 01n0L molurnagau> rag 
um, + SQOLAD soda, A313 VOX 


"0n 
AND 10NOLDOLD Ίο ἸῸΝ “43031 
->ap Ὅσῳ lu o1349A2 319 ἸῸΝ 


96-466 "IX 1ο0 T 


0G-PI "xx en] 4S 


12020 
not Ďiaviovg UL az 40410 
mau 09100 Ἅαηι skajanz 
svdariu sks soa  nov>umnp 


slu. sorpriliasd not x3 myu Un 
| no 113x00 119 alla MLaY alim 


—AMLND 1011091902 10N 


93-406 ‘GS 100 AIX HIB IS 


"nor sodLVIT 40.» 
dayiovg lii az 4QaY0X αρτίῃ 
43] maju οι Ὁ avig slajayž 
Sodan sur sm3 nov>ump sl 
soimrluaak noL n01001L 32 1100 
αρ ο] Un go “aaa ag AN 


— ἀρ Ό 239 4044919201 . 


86-496 6% «97 "IAXX 798 W 5 


A wWISVIL 


29 


ΤΗΕ NEW TESTAMENT RATIONALE 


"ova qo 
ἸΟΧ 313VýVx344ApLVDA nojdny 
noL 4010409 aot μα] 


aoidliLou QL ἸῸΝ aoLnoL 4010 
4QL 3147903 4793 ΟἿΑ, s»7200 


"110 
-Laripap aliia al. 519 “34laju 
402 SINPDO “313310 OLNOL 


„110771 ha 
ὧν az 41103 lylgorno lavox 
U aoidliLou 91 OLNOJ, . 4A 3N 


fap.ola 130 0L 0130 
ποἸόίμοι OL 1M SmLavom 
1 4 ^ 


*a10l.arl pao 
aura al. 519 311310 0100. 


- dora daun 0L orimo 
Q4 41103 Nor OLNOJ, „13113 ἸῸΝ 
1300V%3 
spol 1.pido X23 10x 


40109 13gvv2 


40431] 
-911nXx3 ama daun Qt “nor 
Ίππο dl az lxkgnrg baron 
lU aoıdhıou 94 OLNOJ, „ao0A3Y 


19 ola 1130 Q4 pism 
50). Ὁ DM ‘dod Lon QL qx 


"41. olarlvav 
alia aks sj» 313310 0100. 


. 104310919 amria daun 0L nom 
Ῥτίῳ.ο QL 41103 OLAOJ, .amhay 
$10.00 433093 ἸῸΝ 4300VM3 
spol .pido X03 


40109 amgloN ἸῸΝ 


ON 
-vou daun aoasnonanXyx> οφ. 
slxlg»19 slu aor! vryo 9L an 
τοῦ OLNOJ, "51000 3113 ἸῸΝ 


"S9LADLL NOLAD 
33 10113 ἸῸΝ 510100 139993 


$0.0l.1.0100 X3 


aodl Lou amgoy 10% 


‘aon roo oL 11102 
92001 „313DV „43173 ἸῸΝ 
$1000 13/003 ἸῸΝ 43.002 
sooLAoxa3 


αοιόρ πωρ/ον — 


“amıLdorlo 110369 
529 4043Tloa4n X53 amyyou 1094 
91 süxügo sks aon Prim 
QL 411029 Oph olnoL «594 
παρα NOLAD 33 3137]] . aMAZY 


510 ΨΩΌ 133093 


spoltoidnXaa 10x 


aoiditou a mglov ἸῸΝ 


"nor prim oL 111.02 
91001 „3134 pb 313g ΏΥ „3113 


$101, 
-lgor! S10L sQoQ ἸῸΝ A30D\N2 


svolLoyas ἸῸΝ 


404109 snoolJ 9 4pglov — 


24 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


of inestimable value to the Christian Church in all ages.! 
Following, therefore, the text of Dr. Eberhard Nestle; 
and placing the four accounts in parallel columns, let us 
note some of their points of agreement and difference.? 

S. Matthew and S. Mark connect the Institution of the 
Eucharist in a general way with His last Passover, without 
distinguishing clearly the two rites. S. Paul simply gives 
the occasion of the Institution as “in the night in which he 
was delivered up" without any reference to the Passover 
at all, for he is concerned not so much with the question of 
historical detail in the background of the first Eucharist, as 
with the Eucharist itself, the distinetive Christian service. 
S. Luke, however, who had made careful research,“ distin- 
guishes the Passover and the Eucharist, and puts our Lord’s 
words concerning “the fruit of the vine," in their proper 
relation, namely, as referring to the Paschal cup (or cups). 
This amendment of the earlier form of the tradition was 
necessary for the Church at large, lest any confusion should 
arise. S. Luke’s narrative, giving us not only the historical 
setting in greater fulness, but also bringing into strong relief 
the old (and vanishing) Passover and the new (Christian) 
sacrifice which is for all peoples and all times, corroborates 
silently S. Paul’s world-wide promulgation of the Eucharist, 
and at the same time obviates any misconception arising 
from the less elearly articulated structure of the other two 
accounts. Let there be no mistake. The last Passover 
was one thing, Christ’s Eucharist is another. 

The most striking and most interesting thing, however, 
that a comparison of these four narratives reveals, is 
the fact that the sequence of Christ’s procedure, the order 


! See note 2 on p. 20. 

? Novum Testamentum Graece . . . curavit Eberhard Nestle. 
Editio sexta recognita. Stuttgart, 1906... 3 See Table V., pp. 22-23. 

* Luke i. 3: "Eóo£e κἀμοὶ παρηκολουθηκότι ἄνωθεν πᾶσιν ἀκριβῶς 
καθεξῆς σοι γράψαι, κράτιστε Θεόφιλε. 

5 Matt. xxvi. 20; Mark xiv. 25; Luke xxii. 18. 


THE NEW^ TESTA ENT RATIONALE 25 


of His aets and words in regard to the bread and the cup 
respectively, is the same in all. The rationale of the 
original Eucharist as described in each account is identical. 
In spite of differences of detail there is complete uniform- 
ity of structure. Moreover, the variations of these 
parallel narratives are comparatively slight and do but 
serve to bring out more clearly the picture of what Christ 
did and said upon that ever memorable occasion. The 
order of the institution may be presented briefly thus: 

(1) The setting apart of the bread and of the cup for 
the New Passover by the Saviour — “he took bread,”’ 
“he took the cup.” ὁ 

(2) An act upon the part of Christ, described by two 
words (εὐχαριστεῖν, εὐλογεῖν) that are used synonymously 
here ' (and afterward also by early Christian writers) — 
“he gave thanks," “he blessed." We must use both 
expressions in English if we wish to show the full content 
of this “ thanksgiving-blessing." 

(3) The distribution of either element to the disciples 
(the bread being first broken in order that they all might 
share in the one loaf that Christ had hallowed) with the 
statement appropriate to each — “This is ‚My Body," 
etc., “This is My Blood," ete. 

(4) The reiterated command — “Do this in remem- 
brance of Me," “This do ye . . . in remembrance of Me." 

Pondering over the significance of this uniformity, three 
things impress themselves upon our notice: (1) that 
after Christ had taken the bread and the cup for use 
in His new service, He made an act of prayer to God 
with words not recorded for us; and (2) that it was not 
until ajter this that He declared the nature of the gift 


‘Cf. Sadler on 1 Cor. xi. 24, New York, 1889, p. 180; Scuda- 
more, Notitia Eucharistica, second edition, London, 1876, pp. 
573-574; Watterich, Der Konsekrationsmoment im heiligen Abend- 
mahl, Heidelberg, 1896, pp. 1-4; Hoppe, Die Epiklesis, ete.; 
Schaffhausen, 1864, pp. 294-301. 


20 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


He proffered; and (3) that He added a command and gave 
a commission to do what He had done. In other words, 
the declarations, “ This is My Body,” ete., “This is My 
Blood,” ete., were not made except at the distribution 
of each consecrated element, and this distribution did 
not take place until after Christ"s act of “ thanksgiving- 
blessing." We may therefore reasonably conclude that 
Christ consecrated the elements by His act of prayer to God 
for that end, and that His subsequent statements are not 
in any case words of blessing or consecration, but dec- 
larations of fact, of fact as effected by His blessing.! 
Moreover, as Christ bade His apostles to do what He had 
done, that command will be fulfilled and the priestly com- 
mission executed by the most exact compliance with His 
pattern that is possible. Moreover, no sophistry can set 


1 Cf. Richard Hooker, Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, Book 
V., Chap. LXVIL, 4. (Works, Vol. II., pp. 82-83, Oxford, 1850.) 

“They saw their Lord and Master with hands and eyes lifted 
up to heaven first bless and consecrate for the endless good of all 
generations till the world's end the chosen elements of bread and 
wine, which elements made for ever the instruments of life by vir- 
tue of his divine benediction," etc. 

Cf. also Thorndike, An Epilogue, etc., Book III. Of the Laws of 
the Church, Chap. IV., $6. (Works, A.C.L., Vol. IV., p. 52.) 
“And is not Christ said to have 'blessed' the elements? Is it 
not said, that, having ‘taken’ and “blessed" and ‘broken’ the 
bread, delivering it to His disciples, He affirmed it to be His Body 
at the present when He delivered it? Can the becoming of it His 
Body be imputed to the taking, or breaking, or delivering of it? 
Doth it not remain then, that it be imputed to the blessing of it ?" 
(Cf. also pp. 195-197 below.) 

Cf. the Decrees of the Council of Trent, Sess. XIII., cap. I.,in 
which it is distinctly affirmed that Christ consecrated by His bless- 
ing and afterward testified to the truth of the gifts He proffered in 
the express words recorded in Holy Scripture. “Post panis, 
vinique benedictionem, se suum ipsius corpus illis praebere, 86 
suum sanguinem, disertis et perspicuis verbis testatus est." 
Canones, et Decreta Sacrosancti Oecumenici, εἰ Generalis Concilii 
Tridentini, etc., Romae, 1564, p. 72. 


ΤΗΕ NEW TESTAMENT RATIONALE 27 


aside the rationale and sequence of those acts commanded 
to be followed, as made known to us from the fourfold 
witness of the New Testament. There is an irresistible 
logie of plain fact in the simple, almost bare narratives of 
the Evangelists and S. Paul that cuts at the root of all 
those subtleties invented in the later Middle Ages in order 
to justify a notion of Eucharistie consecration into which 
Western Christendom had drifted. It cannot be insisted 
upon too strongly that the words of declaration which 
Christ spoke were not in any sense words of blessing, but 
proclamations of fact. The method of Christ’s consecra- 
tion is recorded, but not the words He used. 

This same act we have noted is described by two different 
words, employed synonymously, εὐχαριστεῖν, εὐλογεῖν.' 
It is surely most reasonable to believe that this is in order 
to complete the picture, the one word supplying a touch 
of meaning that is lacking in the other. Our Lord pro- 
nounced a special “ thanksgiving” (or * blessing") over the 
bread and over the cup of the Eucharist. This “ thanks- 
giving,” while not identical with the Paschal one spoken 
shortly before it by Christ, yet bore such an analogy to 
its Jewish prototy pe as to be described by the same words, 
indicating that it, too, contained not only praise to God, 
but also prayer for God’s blessing upon the material of 
the sacrifice, 1.6. that the bread and the wine might 
become spiritual meat and drink. This Eucharistie 


1 Cf. Dr. Swete, in The Journal of Theological Studies, Vol. III., 
p. 163, note 1. (The note on εὐχαριστία --- εὐχαριστεῖν in the same 
volume of the J. Th. S., pp. 594-598, by the late Dr. Hort, may be 
compared.) 

2Cf. The Jewish Encyclopaedia, Vol. XI., article SHEMONEH 
"EsnEH, pp. 270-282, especially pp. 270-272. It is easy to see 
the twofold character of many of these “ benedictions." They con- 
tain not only thanks to God for some gift, but also a petition for 
His blessing upon it. Cf. Thorndike, The Service of God at Reli- 
gious Assemblies, Chap. X., $49 (A.C.L., Vol. I., pp. 344-345). 
Cf. John Johnson, quoted below (Chap. V.), p. 212. 


25 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


“thanksgiving” is the culmination and crown of other 
noteworthy similar acts on Christ’s part, namely, in the 
pedagogic miracles of the feeding of the five thousand, and 
of the four thousand. Christ in His Eucharistie offering 
gives us the model to copy, 1.6. His ἀναφορά Or εὐχαριστία (in 
the broadest sense, as describing the whole act) — εὐχαριστία 
(in the narrower sense, as praise-giving) plus εὐλογία 
(as practically equivalent to ἐπίκλησι). Moreover, it 
is from this association of the two words that the Eucha- 
rist derived its early names of εὐχαριστία and εὐλογία, the 
first! being applied to the act of consecration, the con- 
secrated elements, and to the whole service, and the 
second ? to the act of consecration and to the consecrated 
elements chiefly. The beginning of these technical 
uses is already visible in the New Testament alongside 
of their more ordinary employment. Τὺ is indeed not 
too much to say, that εὐχαριστεῖν and εὐλογεῖν are practi- 
eally equated for this special ecclesiastical use in post- 
Apostolie Greek, as may be seen in S. Justin Martyr's? 
use of εὐχαριστεῖν in the passive voice, which came 
thus to conform itself to the meaning and uses of the 
transitive εὐλογεῖν." ' Thus it becomes impressed upon us 
that in the first Eucharist, Christ's consecration of the 
elements to be His Body and Blood, is contained in, 
and described for us under His act of “thanksgiving- 
blessing." 

A Greek writer of the eighteenth century sums up the 
rationale of the first Eucharist thus: — 


! Swete, op. cit., p. 163. Cf. Brightman, Liturgies E. and W., 
Vol. L, p. 589, s.v. Thanksgiving. Cf. Suicer, T'hesaurus, s.v. 
εὐχαριστία, TI. 

2 Cf. Brightman, op. eit., p. 597, s.v. εὐλογεῖν; s.v. εὐλογία. Cf. 
Suicer, op. cit., s.v. εὐλογέω, III.; s.v. εὐλογία, IV. 

? See Appendix, pp. 247, 248. 

* Cf. Sophocles, Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine 
Periods, Boston, 1870, s.v. εὐχαριστέω, 3, pp. 545-546. Cf. Suicer, 
op. cit., s.v. εὐχαριστέω. Cf. Clement of Alexandria, Appendix, p. 249. 


THE NEW TESTAMENT RATIONALE 29 


“For our Lord Jesus celebrated His holy supper, both as 
God and as Man. As God on the one hand, by His Divine 
and all powerful will and operation, He blessed and conse- 
crated the bread and wine to be His Body and Blood. AsMan 
on the other hand, He joined to His Divine blessing prayers 
to God, and invocations, raising His eyes heavenward to the 
Almighty God, His Father, and giving thanks to Him, He 
blessed, hallowed and consecrated the bread and the cup. 
And this alone it is, which He commanded us to do, saying 
“This do ye," that is to say, what He did as Man. And 
again, what He did as God, it is Impossible for the priest 
to imitate, but he [the priest] simply begs and invokes and 
implores, that the Holy Spirit, by the good pleasure of the 
heavenly Father, and the coöperation of His only-begotten 
Son, may descend, and make, and accomplish this Divine 
and ineffable consecration." ! And again, “For Christ did 
not say Speak ye this,’ but said ‘Do ye this,’ that is,“ Do 
ye, without variation, as ye saw Me do; I took bread, I 
gave thanks, I broke, I gave, I spoke. This do ye also. 
Take bread, give thanks, bless, break, give, speak.’ "? 

Evidence of the praxis of the Apostolic Church in the 
matter of the consecration of the Eucharist is clearly 
indicated by S. Paul in 1 Cor. x. 16: “the cup of the 
blessing, which [cup] we bless," ete. The hallowing of 
the cup is distinctly postulated, and the difference also 
between the Christian “cup of the blessing," which is the 
“eommunion of the blood of Christ," and the Paschal 
“cup of blessing over food" plainly laid down.“ It is 


! Eustratius Argentes, Against Azymes, Part II., Postulate 2, 
§§ 68,69. For the Greek, see Appendix, pp. 327-328. Cf. ibid., 
δὲ 72-76, Appendix, pp. 328-330. 

2 Ibid., Part II., Postulate 2, Supplement II., Answer 3. For 
the Greek, see Appendix, p. 330. 

31 Cor. x. 16: Τὸ ποτήριον τῆς εὐλογίας ὃ εὐλογοῦμεν, οὐχὶ κοινωνία 
ἐστὶν τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ; 

* Cf. the Rev. G. H. Box in The Journal of Theological Studies, 
Vol. III., p. 362 (April, 1902). 


90 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


impossible to escape the emphasis put upon the blessing 
or consecration of the cup, which causes it to become the 
“communion of the blood of Christ." Of the Eucharistie 
bread it is postulated similarly, that, as broken for dis- 
tribution, it is “the communion of the body of Christ," 
thus involving its consecration prior to its being ministered 
to the communicants. 

In another place in the same epistle, 1 Cor. xiv. 16, 17,! 
we have an instance of the use of εὐχαριστεῖν and εὐλογεῖν, 
most easily understood as referring to the Eucharistie 
blessing. This central act of blessing must be so made 
that it can be followed by him whose act it is and for 
whom it is offered, and who can thus express his assent 
thereto, in the exercise of his Christian lay-priesthood by 
responding, “ Amen." “Else if thou bless in spirit, how 
shall he that filleth the place of layman say the ‘Amen’ 
at thy Eucharist, since he knoweth not what thou art say- 
ing? Thou, indeed, art giving thanks [‘eucharisting’] 
well, but the other is not being edified." The early 
witness of S. Justin Martyr? for the people's “ Amen" at 
the close of the Eucharistie prayer serves to strengthen 
this view of the passage. And taken in connection with 
the other (certain) references to the Eucharist in this epis- 
tle, it 15 surely most reasonable to regard the Apostle as 
alluding here also to the “ thanksgiving " or “ blessing" par 
excellence in the Church's celebration of her proper sacri- 
fice, a feature, moreover, that had been so prominent an 
act of Christ's at the institution. 

Again, does it not seem reasonable to think that in the 
epistle to the Romans, xv. 10,3 S. Paul is applying to him- 


! 1 Cor. xiv. 16, 17: ᾿Επεὶ ἐὰν εὐλογῇς πνεύματι, ὁ ἀναπληρῶν τὸν 
τόπον τοῦ ἰδιώτου πῶς ἐρεῖ τὸ ᾽Αμὴν ἐπὶ τῇ σῇ εὐχαριστίᾳ; ἐπειδὴ τί 
λέγεις οὐκ οἶδεν - σὺ μὲν γὰρ καλῶς εὐχαριστεῖς, ἀλλ ὁ ἕτερος οὐκ οἰκοδο- 
μεῖται. ? See Appendix, pp. 247, 248. 

3 Romans xv. 16: Eis rô εἶναί µε λειτουργὸν Χριστοῦ ᾿]ησοῦ eis τὰ 
ἔθνη, ἱερουργοῦντα τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ: Θεοῦ, ἵνα γένηται ἡ προσφορὰ τῶν 
ἐθνῶν εὐπρόσδεκτος, ἡγιασμένη ἐν Πνεύματι ᾿Αγίῳ. 


THE NEW TESTAMENT RATIONALE Sl 


self, in illustrating his relation to the Gentile Christians, 
a figure of speech derived from the Christian sacrifice, 1.6. 
the Eucharist, rather than from any Jewish oblation ? 
There was no violent transition from the Apostolic to the 
post-Apostolic age, and the rationale of the Church’s 
Eucharistie observance, as she emerges from her hiding 
place after the era of the persecution, conforms so closely 
to the lines of S. Pauľs metaphor, that it seems ungues- 
tionably to have been the same from the beginning. 5. 
Pauľs priestly act in presenting with thanksgiving the 
oblations of bread and wine in commemoration of Christ’s 
sacrifice, and the Divine acceptance of those gifts and the 
hallowing thereof by the Holy Spirit in answer to the 
Apostle's invocation, gives us the necessary (and, we may 
add, the only adequate) pattern for his comparison. 
“That I should be a minister of Jesus Christ to the Gen- 
tiles, ministering in sacrifice the gospel of God, in order 
that the offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable, 
being sanctified by the Holy Ghost." It is not the 
writer's purpose to set forth these last two passages as 
proofs positive, but at the same time, they seem to him 
to fall into line most naturally, as indications or hints of 
early Christian praxis, linking together and harmonizing 
Christ's institution on the one hand, and the earliest 
known liturgical remains on the other. In view of the un- 
doubted fact that the Eucharist was the focus of Christian 
worship and the centre of the Church’s corporate life 
from the first, and that Apostolic patterns were tena- 
ciously held, it does not seem unreasonable to believe 
that S. Paul gives us a passing glimpse of the rationale 
of the Eucharistie Anaphora as followed out in his 
own day.! . 

There remains one more passage to which we may direct 
our attention for a moment. In the first epistle to 


1 Cf. Hickes, The Christian Priesthood Asserted, Chap. II., $ X., 
Works, A.C.L., Vol. II., pp. 93-100. 


uo THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Timothy, iv. 4, 5,! in rebutting the error of those hereties 
who taught to abstain from meats (foods) which God 
created to be partaken of with thanksgiving, by those who 
believe and have a clear knowledge of the truth, S. Paul 
adds, “for every created thing of God is good, and not to be 
rejected, supposing it to be received with thanksgiving, for 
it is hallowed by the word of God and prayer." God at the 
beginning pronounced His handiwork to be good, and what 
He has made for food is to be taken with thankfulness, for 
it 15 sanctified to the ends for which He made it, by His 
own word as originally spoken, and by the prayer of the user 
that it may be blessed to his individual benefit. If this be 
true of thefood that 15 taken for bodily nourishment merely, 
how much more so in the case of the Eucharistic bread and 
wine, consecrated to be the nurture of oursouls! Soclearly 
was this in the mind of the primitive Church, that we shall 
see these words of the Apostle early employed by Christian 
writers “ in reference to the hallowing of the Eucharistie 
elements, as grounded on Christ's words of institution and 
command, as originally and once for all spoken, through 
the agency of the Church's prayer, or invocation.? 

! ] Timothy iv. 4, 5: Ὅτι πᾶν κτίσμα Θεοῦ καλόν, καὶ οὐδὲν ἀπόβλητον 
μετὰ εὐχαριστίας λαμβανόμενον : ἁγιάζεται γὰρ διὰ λόγου Θεοῦ καὶ ἐντεύξεως. 

? E.g. Origen on Matt. xv. 11 (Appendix, p. 249); Gregory 
of Nyssa, Oratio Catechetica, 37 (Appendix, p. 266). 

3 Cf. Thorndike, An Epilogue, etc. Bk. III., Chap. IV., ὃ 7. 
(A.C.L., Vol. IV., p. 53): "The creatures of God then are 
sanctified to the nourishment of our bodies by thanksgiving, with 
prayer for God's blessing; and shall we think, that that thanks- 
giving, wherewith they are sanctified to the nourishment of our 
souls, doth not include prayer to the effect intended, that they 
may become the Body and Blood of Christ, Which God by this 
sacrament pretends to feed our souls with? And doth not the 
execution of our Saviour's institution, when He says, ‘Do this,’ 
consist in giving God thanks for the redemption of mankind, 
with prayer, that we may be fed by the Flesh and Blood of 
Christ in the eucharist?" 

Cf. Seudamore, Notitia Eucharistica, second edition, London, 
1876, Chap. VI., $ V., pp. 572 seq., esp. pp. 577—580. 


ΤΗΕ NEW TESTAMENT RATIONALE 99 


In coneluding our brief survey of the New Testament 
witness to the rationale of Eucharistie eonsecration, may 
we not reasonably expect to find the great central act of 
the Liturgy, as celebrated by the post-Apostolie Church, 
following closely the pattern set by Christ Himself? 
Nor will our expectation be disappointed. When the 
Church comes together to celebrate the Holy Eucharist, 
we shall find hearts and minds lifted heavenward, and 
hear a solemn thanksgiving go up to God for His loving- 
kindnesses and tender mercies, interwoven with the praises 
which are offered to Him continually by the angelic hosts; 
and then, after the reiteration of Christ’s Warrant by the 
rehearsal of the Narrative of His Institution of the Eucha- 
rist, the presentation and offering of the bread and wine 
in memorial of Him who died and rose again for us, and 
thereafter most humble praver made to God the Father 
for the hallowing of the antitypes of bread and wine, — 
before the Church presumes to give them to Her children 
as the Body and Blood of Christ. Everywhere shall we 
find the Church consecrating the Eucharistie sacrifice 
by her prayer to her heavenly Father for His blessing 
upon the offered gifts. In later times, alas, we shall find 
the meaning of the Roman Canon Missae perverted by a 
new theory of consecration, and the weak English Prayer 
of Consecration involved in that misunderstanding, but 
our American Prayer of Consecration we shall find in agree- 
ment with all the other Liturgies of the Church Catholie, 
following the Apostolic model — that of the Master Himself. 


CHAPTER II 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS AND THE LITURGICAL TRADITION ! 
OF THE UNDIVIDED CHURCH 


THE witness of the Fathers and of the early liturgical 
uses tells but one story. With great diversity of detail, 
the same principles are found running through the ecele- 
siastical writers of widely separated ages and places. The 
incidental character of much of the testimony also does 
but give it the greater value. Moreover, no dispute arose 
upon this point until the thirteenth? century, and the 
praxis of the whole Christian Church was uniform, until 
there was developed in the West a new rationale in the 
understanding of the Canon Missae, a development that 
took its rise in the twelfth * century and which made so 
rapid progress that by the fourteenth“ century the Churches 
that paid homage to the see of Peter had not only for- 
gotten their own earlier belief and practice, but had even 
come to impugn the unbroken tradition of the Eastern 
Churches as a novelty. The early testimony links on to 


! This chapter includes the unbroken tradition regarding the 
rationale of Eucharistie consecration, which has been maintained 
by all the Oriental Churches to the present day. For while the 
objections made by Rome brought in controversy between East 
and West, they served but to strengthen the Eastern Christians 
in their adherence to the original tradition of the undivided Church. 

? Cf. below, pp. 90-91, and Le Brun, Défense, etc., pp. 62-63. 

3 Its roots can be traced to the ninth century, as we shall see 
in Chap. IV., but not until after the Berengarian controversy, 
in the eleventh century, and after the new elevation of the host 
was introduced in the twelfth century, can the development be 
said to have begun. * See below, pp. 95-96. 

34 


ΤΗΕ PATRISTIC WITNESS 35 


that contained in the New Testament, and the ever in- 
creasing stream of witnesses from the beginning, leaves the 
Roman digression (that arose so late) as an insignificant 
island in its midst. The witnesses who are to testify 
will speak for themselves without much comment. The 
original Latin or Greek will be found in the Appendix. 

S. Justin Martyr (110-165 A.p.) is the first writer! 
who gives us clear evidence about the Eucharist as Lit- 
urgy. In his first Apology, in the course of chapters 65, 
66, and 67, he says: “ Then there is brought to the presi- 
dent of the brethren bread and a cup of water mixed with 
wine, and he taking them sends up praise and glory to the 
Father of all through the name of the Son and of the Holy 
Ghost, and makes thanksgiving at length for our being 
counted worthy of these things from Him. And when he 
has concluded the prayers and the thanksgiving, all 
the people present assent, saying, ‘Amen.’ Amen in the 
Hebrew tongue signifies, so be it. And when the presi- 
dent has given thanks, and all the people have expressed 
their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to 
each of those present to partake of the consecrated bread 
and wine and water, and to those not present they carry 
away [a portion]. 

* And this food is called by us Eucharist. . . . For not 
as common bread. and drink do we receive these. But in 
like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour was incarnate by 
the Word of God, and had both flesh and blood for our sal- 


1 The Didache has nothing to our purpose, being entirely aside 
from the current of the Church's liturgical tradition. Cf. Bishop 
Gore, Dissertations, p. 53: “In the document called the Didache 
we have a specimen of an inadequate, indecisive Jewish Chris- 
tianity. It has indeed broken with legalism and circumcision, — 
as a result in part of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple 
— but it has got no distinctive Christian theology beyond the 
barren recitation of the formula of baptism." Cf. Note L, pp. 374 
seq., esp. pp. 377-378, The Church and the M inistry, fourth edition, 
London, 1900. 


90 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


vation, so also have we been taught that the food, from 
which our flesh and blood receive nourishment by assimila- 
tion, having been consecrated by prayer of the Word! that 
is from Him, is the Flesh and Blood of that same Jesus who 
was incarnate. For the Apostles, in the memoirs com- 
posed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus handed 
down what was enjoined upon them: that Jesus took 
bread and when He had given thanks, said, ‘Do this in 
remembrance of Me, this is My Body.’ And likewise 
having taken the cup, and having given thanks, He said, 
“This is My Blood,’ and gave to them alone. . . . And, 
as we said before, when we have ceased from prayer, 
bread and wine and water is brought, and the president 
sends up prayers likewise and thanksgivings, according to 
his power, and the people assent saying, ‘Amen.’ And the 
distribution and the partaking of the consecrated elements 
by each takes place, and to those not present it is sent by 
the hand of the deacons." ? 

It is surely obvious to any fair-minded person reading 
these accounts that the apologist regarded the Eucharist 
to be consecrated by an act of prayer to God for that end, 
and that he appealed to the original institution as illus- 
trating this fact. We note, too, that the rationale of the 
service as outlined by him 1s strietly in accord with the 
New Testament model. 

S. Irenzus (120-202 A.p.) next claims our attention in 
his treatise, Against Heresies. His witness is unmistak- 


! * Prayer of the Word that is from Him," may be taken, either 
as the prayer that flows out of the command, “ Do this," and thus 
the Invocation is described from the point of view of carrying 
out of obedience to Christ's orders; or, “ prayer of the Word," etc., 
may mean prayer for the coming of the Word upon the oblations; 
and the “ Word" may even be equivalent to the Holy Spirit, in this 
connection. Cf. the Rev. J. H. Bethune-Baker's Am Introduc- 
tion to the Early History oj Christian Doctrine (London, 1903), 
p. 399, and note 1. 
? See Appendix, pp. 247-248, for the Greek. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 37 


able. For instance, he says, “For as bread which is from 
the earth, réceiving the invocation of God is no longer com- 
mon bread, but Eucharist, consisting of two things, an 
earthly and an heavenly.’’! No interpretation of these 
words can stand except that the elements are consecrated 
by reason of prayer to God for that end. He also speaks 
of the same thing from a slightly different point of view: 
“When therefore the mingled cup and the manufactured 
bread receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, 
the Body of Christ. . . . Just as a cutting from the vine 
planted in the ground bears fruit in its season, or as the 
grain of wheat falling into the ground and becoming de- 
composed is raised with manifold increase through the 
Spirit of God, who upholdeth all things, and then through 
the wisdom of God serves for the use of men, and having 
received the Word of God becomes Eucharist, that is the 
Body and Blood of Christ." The reference here is either 
to the command of Christ as invoked upon the elements for 
their consecration, or to the consecration as the act of the 
Personal Word, the second Person of the Trinity, or, again, 
perhaps to the Word or utterance of the Invocation itself. 
Irenzus also gives us a most pertinent witness in his de- 
scription of a Gnostic materialistic counterfeit of the 
Church’s consecration of the Eucharist. He says of a 
certain Marcus, “ Pretending to consecrate cups mixed 
with wine, and extending to great length the word of the 
Invocation, he makes them appear purple and reddish."“ 
We may include here also the witness of the (second) 
Pfaffian fragment, without committing ourselves to its 
genuineness. It is quite in harmony with the other teach- 
ing of Irenzus, and also with the liturgical tradition that 
emerges into the light in the fourth century. “For we 
offer to God the bread and the cup of blessing, giving 


1 Book IV., Chap. XVIII., 5; Appendix, p. 248. 
? Book V., Chap. II., 3; Appendix, p. 248. 
3 Book I., Chap. XIII., 2; Appendix, p. 248. 


38 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


thanks to Him that He bade the earth bring forth these 
fruits for our nurture, and then having completed the 
offering, we invoke the Holy Ghost to make this sacrifice, 
both the bread the Body of Christ, and the cup the Blood of 
Christ, so that those partaking of these antitypes may 
obtain remission of sins and life eternal." 4 

Tertullian (145-220 A.D.) gives us no direct testimony, 
although a passage from his treatise, Against Marcion, is 
alleged sometimes as evidence of the view that consecra- 
tion of Eucharist is effected by the repetition of Christ's 
words. “The bread which He took and distributed to the 
disciples He made His Body, saying, ‘This is My Body,’ 
that is, a figure of My Body."? We should note that he is 
treating of the sacrament as distributed, in reference to the 
receiver, and omits from his allusion the mention of the 
previous blessing of the elements recorded in the New 
Testament. Tertullian’s argument is to the effect that 
the appointment by Christ of bread as His sacramental 
or figurative Body is ἃ proof of the reality of the flesh 
which Christ had. His words cannot fairly be pressed 
into any other meaning.? 

Origen (185-252 A.p.) makes distinet reference to the 
primitive custom of consecration of the Eucharist by 
prayer. In his commentary on Matt. xv. 11, he says: 
“Tf all that enters into the mouth goes into the belly and 
15 cast out in the draught, the food hallowed by the word 
of God and prayer also so far as it is material goes into 
the belly and is cast out in the draught; but in accord- 


! See Appendix, p. 249. Cf. Bethune-Baker, op. cit., p. 401. 
Cf. Harvey’s Irenaeus, Introduction,. Vol. L, pp. elxx.-elxxii., 
Cambridge, 1857. 

? See Appendix, p. 250. 

? Even, however, if Tertullian had meant to assert that Christ 
in the institution made the bread to be the sacrament.of His Body, 
by His declaration; this would by no means prove that he thought 
the Church was to consecrate merely by an historical recital of the 
narrative containing Christ's declaration. 


THE ΡΑΤΗΙΡΤΙΟ WITNESS 39 


ance with the prayer made over it, in accordance with the 
analogy of faith, it becomes profitable, and a cause of en- 
lightenment of the mind that regards that which is profit- 
able. For it is not the matter of the bread, but the word 
spoken over it that profits him that eats it not unworthily 
of the Lord." ! 

Again, in his book, Against Celsus, he says, “ But we give 
thanks to the Creator of all, and with thanksgiving and 
prayer for the things we have received, we eat the bread 
that has been offered and has become by prayer a certain 
holy Body, which sanctifies those who partake of it with a 
right intention." ? 

S. Cyprian of Carthage (A.p. 200-258) tells us that 
“The oblation cannot be consecrated where the Holy 
Spirit is not." * He also alludes to the prayer of consecra- 
tion, saying, “ The priest, by way of preface before the 
prayer, prepares the minds of the brethren by saying, 
Lijt up your hearts." * And again, in speaking of one 
who makes divisions in the Church, he says, “ An enemy 
of the altar, a rebel against Christ's sacrifice, for the faith 
faithless, for religion profane, a disobedient servant, an 
unfilial son, a hostile brother, having despised the bishops, 
and having forsaken God's priests, he dares to set up 
another altar, to make another prayer with unauthorized 
words, to profane the truth of the Lord's offering by false 
sacrifices." ? 

Firmilian of Cesarea, writing to Cyprian, 256 a.p., 
speaks of a woman who even “dared frequently to do this, 
namely, to pretend that with an invocation not to be con- 
temned she consecrated bread and made the Eucharist.’’ ® 

Dionysius of Alexandria (f c. 264 A.p.) says he would 
not dare to rebaptize “ one who had listened to the conse- 
cration, and had joined in uttering the Amen, and who 

! See Appendix, p. 249. * Ibid., p. 250. 


2 [bid., pp. 249-250. 5 Ibid., pp. 250-251. 
3 Ibid., p. 250. ® Ibid., p. 250. 


40 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


had stood near the table and had stretched forth his hands 
to receive the holy food." ! 

S. Athanasius of Alexandria (296-373 Α.Ρ.) says, in a 
sermon to those preparing for baptism, “You will see 
the levites bringing breads and a cup of wine, and order- 
ing the table. And so long as the intercessions and sup- 
plications have not been made, it is merely the bread and 
the cup. But when the great and wonderful prayers are 
completed, then the bread becomes the Body and the cup 
the Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ." ? And again,“ Let us 
come to the consecration of the mysteries. "This bread and 
this cup, so long as the prayers and supplications have not 
been made, are mere elements. But when the great and 
holy supplications have been put up, the Word comes 
down upon the bread and the cup, and it becomes His 
Body: * 

The Ethiopic Church Ordinances (c. 335 A.D.) contain an 
Anaphora which we must quote at least in part: — 

“We give thee thanks, O Lord, in thy beloved Son Jesus. 
Christ whom in the last days thou didst send unto us ἃ 
saviour and redeemer, the angel of thy counsel, who is the 
Word from thee, through whom thou madest all things 
by thy will. And thou sentest him from heaven into the 
bosom of the virgin: he was made flesh and was carried 
in the womb and thy Son was revealed of the Holy Ghost. 
that he might fulfil thy will.and make a people for thee 
by stretching out his hands, suffering to loose the sufferers 
that trust in thee: who was delivered of his own will to 
the passion that he might destroy death and burst the 
bonds of Satan and trample on hades and lead forth the 


! See Appendix, p. 251. ? Ibid., p. 251. 
8 Ibid., p. 251. Cf. also Eusebius of Czsarea (Panegyric upon 
Constantine, IV., 9): “Who else than our Saviour alone gave 


the tradition to His disciples to consecrate the unbloody and 
reasonable sacrifices through prayers and an ineffable address 
to God?" See Appendix, p. 251. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 41 


saints, and establish a covenant and make known his resur- 
rection. Therefore he took bread, gave thanks and said 
Take eat: this is my body which is broken for you. And 
likewise also the eup and said This is my blood which is 
shed for you: as often as ye do this ye shall do it in re- 
membrance of me. 

“Remembering therefore his death and his resurrection 
we offer thee this bread and cup giving thanks unto thee 
for that thou hast made us meet to stand before thee and 
do thee priestly service. We beseech thee that thou 
wouldest send thine Holy Spirit on the oblation of this 
church: give it together unto all them that partake [for] 
sanctification and for fulfilling with the Holy Ghost and for 
confirming true faith, that they may laud and praise thee 
in thy Son Jesus Christ, through whom to thee be glory 
and dominion in the holy church both now and ever and 
world without end. Amen.’ ! 

Our next witness is the recently discovered Sacra- 
mentary of Serapion, Bishop of Thmuis, in Egypt, the 
prayers of which are dated about 350 a.p. It comes to 
“us from a time when the custom still prevailed of each 
bishop setting forth his own liturgy, choosing his own 
phraseology, but eonforming in plan or rationale to the 
general model or norm. The most remarkable feature of 
this liturgy is that the narrative of institution and the 
objective commemoration of Christ’s death are so woven 
together as make it evident that Christ’s declarations, 
“This is My Body,” “This is My Blood," are quoted simply 
as historical statements. The Invocation which follows 
cannot, therefore, be explained away by any ingenious 
sophistry. It is in the somewhat unusual form of a prayer 
for the descent of the Word upon the elements. This may 
be understood either as meaning the Holy Spirit, for 
Serapion's theology is a little hazy in the matter of the 


ı Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Vol. E ας 
189-190. 


42 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


distinction of the Son and the Holy Spirit,’ or as indicating 
the Personal Word. Whether we take this Invocation to 
be a prayer for the Holy Spirit to make the elements 
Christ’s Body and Blood, or for the Second Person of the 
Holy Trinity to make them His own Body and Blood, the 
result is the same so far as the witness of this liturgical 
piece is concerned, and we are amply justified in quoting 
the combined Narrative of Institution and Oblation, and 
also the Invocation itself. - 

“Full is the heaven, full also is the earth, of Thy excel- 
lent glory, O Lord of Hosts: fill also this sacrifice with 
Thy power and Thy participation: for to Thee have we 
offered this living sacrifice, this unbloody offering. To 
Thee have we offered this bread, the likeness of the Body 
of the only-begotten. This bread is the likeness of His 
holy Body, for the Lord Jesus Christ in the night in which 
He was betrayed took bread and brake and gave to His 
disciples saying, Take and eat, this is My Body which is 
being broken for you for remission of sins. Wherefore 
we also making the likeness of His death have offered the 
bread, and we beseech Thee through this sacrifice be 
reconciled to us all, and be mereiful, Ο God of truth: and 
as this bread had been scattered upon the top of the moun- 
tains and having been gathered together became one, 50 
also gather Thy holy Church out of every nation, and every 
country and every city, and village and house and make 
one living Catholie Church. We have offered also the cup, 
the likeness of His Blood, for the Lord Jesus Christ taking 
a cup, after supper, said to His own disciples, Take, 
drink, this is the new covenant, which is My Blood, which 
is being shed for you for remission of sins. Wherefore 
we also have offered the cup, presenting a likenessof His 
Blood. O God of truth, let Thy holy Word come to so- 
journ on this bread, that the bread may become the Body 
of the Word, and on this cup, that the cup may become 


1 Cf. Bethune-Baker, op. cit., p. 399, note 1, and p. 401 (note). 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 43 


the Blood of the Truth. And make all who communicate, 
to receive a medicine of life for the healing of every sick- 
ness, and for the enabling of all advancement and virtue, 
not for condemnation, O God of truth, and not for censure 
and reproach. For Thee, the uncreated, have we in- 
voked through the Only-begotten, in the Holy Spirit." ! 

The Anaphora of the Liturgy of the Eighth Book of the 
Apostolic Constitutions, though 1t is the compilation of an 
unknown writer of heretical tendencies, made in the second 
half of the fourth century, bears its witness to the uniform 
tradition of consecration of the Eucharist by prayer or 
invocation. We will quote that part which most nearly 
corresponds to the Prayer of Consecration in the American 
Prayer Book. 

* Remembering therefore those things which for our 
sake He endured, we give thanks to Thee, O God Almighty, 
not as we ought, but as we are able, and fulfil His institu- 
tion. For in the same night in which He was betrayed, 
taking bread in His holy and undefiled hands, and looking 
up to Thee His God and Father, and breaking it, He gave 
it to His disciples, saying, This is the Mystery of the New 
Testament, take of it, eat, this is My Body, which is broken 
for many for the remission of sins. Likewise also having 
mingled the cup with wine and water, and having hallowed 
it, He gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it, this is 
My Blood, which is shed for many for the remission of sins; 
do this in remembrance of Me: for as often as ye eat this 
bread and drink this cup, ye do shew forth My death till 
I come. 

‘Wherefore remembering His passion, death, and resur- 
rection from the dead, His return into heaven, and His 
future second appearing, when He shall come with glory 
and power to judge the quick and the dead, and to render 
to every man according to his works; we offer to Thee, our 
King and our God, according to His institution, this bread 


! See Appendix, pp. 252-253. 


44 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


and this eup, giving thanks to Thee through Him, that 
Thou hast thought us worthy to stand before Thee, and 
do Thee priestly service. And webeseech Thee, that Thou 
wilt look graciously on these gifts lying before Thee, O 
Thou self-suffieing God; and accept them to the honour of 
Thy Christ. And send down Thy Holy Spirit, the witness 
of the sufferings of the Lord Jesus, on this sacrifice, that 
He may make this bread the Body of Thy Christ, and this 
cup the Blood of Thy Christ. That all who shall partake 
of it may be confirmed in godliness, may receive remission 
of their sins, may be delivered from the devil and his de- 
ceit, may be filled with the Holy Ghost, may be made 
worthy of Thy Christ, and may obtain everlasting life; 
Thou, O Lord Almighty, being reconciled to them." ! 

The witness of S. Cyril of Jerusalem (315—386 Α.Ρ.) next 
claims our attention, forming as it does the meeting point 
of the early patristic testimony and the direct witness of 
the earliest liturgical remains. In the course of his cate- 
chetical lectures to those who had been baptized, in prepa- 
ration for their participation in the Liturgy of the Faith- 
ful, and for the reception of Holy Communion, we note the 
following statements: “ For as the bread and wine of the 
Eucharist before the invocation of the holy and adorable 
Trinity were simple bread and wine, while after the invo- 
cation the bread becomes the Body of Christ, and the wine 
the Blood of Christ, so," ete.“ “ For as the bread of the 
Eucharist after the invocation of the Holy Ghost is mere 
bread no longer, but the Body of Christ, so," ete” The 
last lecture is a commentary on the Anaphora of the 
Liturgy of Jerusalem as then in use. 

“The priest cries aloud, Lift up your hearts. . . . Then 
ye answer, We lift them up unto the Lord. . . . Then the 
priest says, Let us give thanks unto the Lord. . . . 'Then 
ye say, It is meet and right, for in giving thanks we do a 
thing meet and right. . . . After this we make mention 


1 See Appendix, pp. 253-254. 2 Ibid.,p.254. ? Ibid., p.254. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 45 


of heaven and earth and sea; of sun and moon; of stars, 
and of all creation rational and irrational, visible and in- 
visible; of angels, archangels, virtues, dominions, prin- 
eipalities, powers, thrones, of the many-faced cherubim, 
in effect repeating that call of David's * O magnify the Lord 
with me. We make mention also of the seraphim, whom 
Esaias in the Holy Spirit saw standing around the throne 
of God, with two wings veiling their face, with twain 
their feet, with twain flying, and saying, ‘Holy, Holy, 
Holy is the Lord of hosts.’ For we recite this divine song 
that has been handed down to us from the seraphim, in 
order that we may be partakers in the hymn of praise 
with the hosts of the world above. 

“Then having sanctified ourselves by these spiritual 
hymns, we beseech the merciful God to send forth the Holy 
Spirit upon the gifts lying before Him; in order that He 
may make the bread the Body of Christ, and the wine the 
Blood of Christ; for whatsoever the Holy Spirit has 
touched 15 sanctified and changed." ! 

A little later in the same lecture we read, in reference to 
the showing of the sacrament to the people as an invitation 
to communion: “ After these things [the intercession and 
the Lord's Prayer] the priest says, ‘Holy things to the 
holy.' Holy arethe offered gifts, having received the over- 
shadowing of the Holy Spirit." ? 

In this description we see the Liturgy of the Christian 
Church fully established, and have a plain, unmistakable 
interpretation of its salient parts. The Narrative of In- 
stitution, being purely historical, is passed over in silence. 
The Invocation, on the contrary, is so essential that it 
receives special and reiterated mention. It is impossible 
honestly to explain away the distinct statements of S. 
Cyril. 

! See Appendix, pp. 254-255. 2 [bid., p. 255. 

S See Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Vol. I., p. 469, 
notes 9 and 11. . 


40 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


S. Optatus of Milevis (fl. e. 368) writing on the schism 
of the Donatists, asks: “ What is so sacrilegious as to 
break down, raze, and remove the altars of God, on which 
you also formerly offered, on which also the vows of 
the people and the members of Christ were laid, whither 
Almighty God was invoked, whither having been peti- 
tioned for, the Holy Ghost descended ?”’ ? 

S. Basil of Caesarea (330-378 A.D.) speaks of the Invo- 
cation as part of the unwritten Apostolic tradition of the 
Church. “ Which of the saints has left in writing the words 
of the Invocation at the consecration of the bread of the 
Eucharist, and of the cup of blessing? For we are not 
sufficed with those words which the Apostle or the Gospel 
recorded, but we say other words, both before and after, 
as having the great power.with reference to the mystery, 
which we received from the unwritten teaching." ? 

S. Ambrose of Milan (340-397 A.p.) asks, in reference to 
the Holy Spirit, “How, then, does He not possess all 
things that pertain to God, Who is named with the Father 
and the Son by the priests in baptism, and is invoked 
in the oblations?"? He also says, in another treatise, 
“Now we, as often as we receive the sacraments, which 
through the mystery of the sacred prayer are trans- 
figured into [Christ's] Flesh and Blood, do show the 
Lord's death." “ 

These passages show S. Ambrose to be entirely en rap- 
port with the general tradition of the Church in his view 
of the rationale of Eucharistic consecration. There are 
passages in other writings of his, namely, Of the Blessings 
of the Patriarchs, and Of the Mysteries (and also in the 
treatise Of the Sacraments, which last is generally considered 
to be inspired by S. Ambrose's Of the Mysteries, or to be 


! See Appendix, p. 255. 

Z De Spiritu Sancto, 27; see Appendix, p. 256. 

3 De Spiritu Sancto, III., 16; see Appendix, p. 256. 
+ De Fide, IV., 10; see Appendix, p. 256. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 47 


- founded upon it, and to have been written c. 400 a.p.!), 
which were pressed into service in the ninth and succeed- 
ing centuries, as supposed props for the new theory of 
Eucharistie consecration, which began to germinate in the 
West at that time.” Examined impartially, however, 
they are by no means found to contradiet the other state- 
ments of S. Ambrose quoted above, nor do they really 
give any support to that theory which grew up long after 
they had been written, a theory that was not even dreamed 
of in the eighth century, to say nothing of those that 
went before. 

In the ninth chapter, Of the Blessings of the Patriarchs, 
occur these words: “ And indeed rich is that bread which 
whoso eats cannot hunger. This bread He [Christ] gave 
to His disciples to distribute to the faithful; and to-day 
He gives to us that bread which He Himself daily as priest 
consecrates by His own words." * Now in view of the fact 
that our Lord's words in S. John vi. 49-52 are quoted just 
after this, it is evident that S. Ambrose is here speaking 
of Christ as fulfilling His pledge of giving His Flesh and 
Blood to Christians in all ages through His appointment 
of the Eucharistie food. Christ is back of and above every 
Eucharist to make good His promise to grant His Flesh as 
the bread from heaven. The more the passage is studied, 
the more one becomes convinced that there is not the 
shadow of suggestion in it, that the Eucharist is to be con- 
sidered consecrated, merely by the priest reciting our Lord's 
words of declaration, which He addressed to His disciples 
in the administration of the sacrament: “This is My 
Body," and “This is My Blood." 

In his treatise Of the Mysteries he says: “ Perhaps you 
will say, I see something else, how do you allege to me 
that I receive Christ's Body? And this yet remains for 


" See Duchesne, Christian Worship: Its Origin and Evolution, 
London, 1903, pp. 177-178. 
2 See Chap. IV., p. 146. S See Appendix, p. 257. 


45 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


us to prove. What evidence do we employ? Let us 
prove that this is not what nature formed, but what the 
blessing consecrated; and that the power of the blessing 
is greater than that of nature, because by the blessing 
even nature itself is changed." After mentioning many 
of the miracles recorded in the Old Testament, he con- 
tinues: “ We observe then that grace has more power than 
nature, and yet up to this point, we are only counting the 
grace of a prophet’s blessing. But if a human blessing 
had so great power as to change nature, what do we say 
concerning the Divine consecration where the very words 
of the Lord and Saviour operate? For that sacrament 
which you receive, is made by Christ's word. But if the 
word of Elias had so great power as to bring down fire 
from heaven, shall not the word of Christ have power to 
change the kind of the elements? Thou hast read con- 
cerning the making of the whole world, * He spake and they 
were made, He commanded and they were created.’ 
Therefore the word of Christ, which could make out of 
nothing what was not, can it not change those things that 
are into what they were not? For it is not less to give 
new natures to things than to change them. 

“ But why do we use arguments? Let us use His own 
example of the incarnation. Did the custom of nature 
precede when Jesus was born of Mary? If we seek the 
[usual] order, a woman has been wont to conceive after 
connection with a man. It remains therefore that a vir- 
gin conceived outside of the order of nature, and this Body 
which we make is that which is of the Virgin. Why do you 
seek the order of nature in the Body of Christ, since the 
Lord Jesus Himself was born of a virgin outside nature. 
'True was the flesh of Christ which was erucified, which was 
buried; truly therefore this is the sacrament of that flesh. 

“The Lord Jesus proclaims, This is My Body. Before 
the blessing of the heavenly words another kind is named, 
after the consecration the Body is signified. He Himself 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 49 


speaks of His Blood. Before the consecration it has 
another name, after the consecration it is called Blood. 
And you say, Amen, that is, it is true. What the mouth 
utters, let the mind within confess. Let the soul feel what 
the word appears to mean." ! 

This passage also has been alleged to assert that conse- 
eration of the Eucharist upon the part of the Church is 
accomplished by the repetition of Christ's words of ad- 
ministration. We will examine it, therefore, somewhat 
closely. 

In order to do so with equity we must start from a con- 
sideration of the environment in which this treatise was 
written, and not from an imaginary background such as 
the later prevailing Scholastie theory of Eucharistie con- 
secration would place behind it. We must remember 
(1) the Greek character of the Ambrosian rite at this time, 
as also that of the other Western rites known as Gallican.? 
S. Ambrose's statements in his treatises Of the Holy Spirit 
and Oj Faith, already quoted are entirely in accord with 
the acknowledged tradition of the Eastern Church from 
the earliest times until to-day, and show a Liturgy in use 
parallel with that described by S. Cyril of Jerusalem, in the 
rationale of the Anaphora. We must also (2) remember 
that while no exact moment was defined as yet, at which 
the elements were considered to be consecrate, neverthe- 
less the whole of what we call the Prayer of Consecration 
was thought necessary to be said to the end of the Invoca- 
tion? We must fulfil our Eucharistie obedience not only 


1 See Appendix, pp. 256-257. 

? Of. Duchesne, Christian Worship: Its Origin and Evolution, 
London, 1903, pp. 88, 93-94. 

* Cf. Dom Cabrol, in the Dict. d'Archéologie chrétienne et de 
Liturgie, article AMEN, col. 1558: “ L'action est une, les différents 
moments n'en sont pas divisibles, elle n'est considérée comme 
accomplie qu'à la fin de l'épiclese." Cf. τὐία., col. 1559, in re 
* consecratio," “ce mot à cette époque a un sens plus général 
qu’aujourd’hui et signifie toute l'action." 


50 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


by offering the memorial gifts, but by impetrating for their 
acceptance and for their hallowing. It should also (3) be 
kept in mind that the Prayer of Consecration or Anaphora, 
as such, is not described or explained by S. Ambrose in de- 
tail, althouzh he alludes to it and bases his argument upon 
its efficacy, in order to satisfy the new communicants that 
they receive more than the senses witness to, when they 
take the sacrament. It is the sacrament as delivered to 
those who approach to receive it, that 1s under primary 
consideration. 

The first thing that we should notice (in $ 50) is that 
S. Ambrose appeals {ο the “ blessing" as that which conse- 
crated the Eucharist. This is a term used to denote the 
part of the Liturgy which we call the Prayer of Consecra- 
tion.‘ Again (in ὃ 52) he refers to the same thing. If 
Elijah’s prayer to God on Mount Carmel was answered by 
the fire of God's acceptance coming down from heaven and 
consuminz the sacrifice,? shall not the command of Christ 
avail to the hallowing of the elements? Does not the ut- 
terance of Christ (who called the world into being by His 
command) become effective through the act of consecra- 
tion? Christ's words of declaration as He gave the Eu- 
charist to His disciples, viz. “This is My Body,” and 
“This is My Blood,” become effectual? to us by reason of 
the Divine Consecration, the Prayer of Blessing made after 
the example of the prophet Elijah.* Christ's proclamation 
(ὃ 54) at the first Eucharist: “This is My Body," and 


! Cf. Dom Cabrol, op. cit., article ANAPHORE, col. 1899: ‘Les 
noms latins de canon missae, canon sacrificii, actio, et méme prae- 
dicatio ou benedictio, designent la méme partie de la messe que 
l'anaphore." 

? See 1 Kings xviii. 36-38. 

3 Cf. S. Chrysostom, Sermons I and II., De Prodit. Judae. See 
below, pp. 58-53, and Appendix, pp. 262-263. 

* Cf. S. Chrysostom, De Sacerdotio, III., 4. See below, p. 56, 
and Appendix, p. 261. Cf. also S. Gregory of Nyssa, In laudem 
fratris Basilii. See below, p. 61, and Appendix, p. 265. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS öl 


His statement that it was His Blood He was giving to His 
disciples, are the Church’s warrant for that blessing which 
she pours forth in obedience to the “ heavenly words," 
that act of consecration which makes, by the beseeching 
of the Divine acceptance and hallowing, the bread and wine 
to be the Body and Blood of Christ. To this act the wor- 
shipper answers “ Amen." It is surely thus plainly evi- 
dent that S. Ambrose is a clear witness in this treatise also 
for the primitive tradition of the Church, namely, the 
consecration of the Eucharist by God in answer to her 
Invocation. 

The treatise Of the Sacraments follows very closely the 
thought and diction of S. Ambrose's Of the Mysteries, and 
therefore claims our attention next. In the one case as in 
the other, the object of the writer is to reassure the com- 
municant, who is being admitted for the first to the full 
privileges of Christian discipleship, of the fact that more 
is received in the Holy Communion than mere bread and 
wine. In Book IV., Chap. IV., $ 14, we read : — 

“ Perhaps thou sayest: ‘My bread is the usual kind.’ 
But that is bread before the words of the sacraments: when 
the consecration ! has taken place, of the bread is made the 
Flesh of Christ. Let us therefore prove this. How can 
what is bread be the Body of Christ? By reason of the 
conseeration. Moreover, by virtue of what words, by. 
virtue of whose utterances? Those of the Lord Jesus. 
For indeed all the other things which are said in the pre- 
ceding [parts of the service], are said by the priest, praises 
are offered to God, petition is made for the people, for 
kings, for others: when the time comes that the venerable 
sacrament should be made, the priest does not utilize? 
his own utterances, but utilizes the utterances of Christ. 
Therefore the utterance * of Christ makes this sacrament. 


! Cf. p. 49, note 3. ? See p. 50, note 3. 
S “ Sermo," practically equivalent in this passage to “ com- 
mand." 


52 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


“$ 15. What is the utterance of Christ? Forsooth that 
by which all things were made. The Lord gave the com- 
mand, and the heaven was made, the Lord commanded 
and the earth was made; the Lord commanded and the 
seas were made: the Lord commanded and the whole crea- 
tion was generated. Thou seest therefore how effective 
is the utterance of Christ. If therefore there is so much 
power in the utterance of the Lord Jesus, that things which 
were not should begin to be, how much more effective is it, 
that things should be what they were, and be changed to 
something else. The heaven was not, the sea was not, the 
land was not, but hearken unto David saying: ‘He spake 
and they were made; He commanded and they were 
created.’ 

“4 16. Therefore that I may reply to thee, it was not the 
Body of Christ before the consecration:! but after the con- 
secration ! I tell thee that indeed 1t is the Body οἱ Christ. 
“He spake and it was made: He commanded and it was 
created.“ Thou wast thyself, but thou wast an old 
creature: after thou wast consecrated thou didst begin 
tobea new creature. Dost thou wish to know how a new 
creature? “Every one,’ guoth he, ‘in Christ is a new 
creature.’ 

“$ 17. Receive therefore after what manner the utter- 

„ance of Christ has been accustomed to change the whole 
creation, and changes when He wills the ordinances of 
nature. ‘In what manner,’ dost thou ask again? Take 
this, and first of all things let us receive an example from 
His [Christ’s] generation. It is the usual thing that man is 
not begotten except of a man and a woman, and by con- 
jugal intercourse; but because the Lord willed, because 
He chose this sacrament, Christ was born of the Holy 
Spirit and a virgin, that is, the Mediator of God and men, 


1 Cf. p. 49, note 3. : 
? Note again the emphasis laid upon the idea of Christ's com- 
mand. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 09 


the Man Christ Jesus. Thou seest therefore that con- 
trary to the ordinances and order [of nature] He was 
born, that Man was born of a virgin." ! 

Then after citing (ὃ 18) a few miracles from the Old 
Testament, he continues: — 

“$19. Dost thou not therefore understand from all these 
how much the heavenly utterance? operates? If it was 
operative in an earthly fountain, if the heavenly utterance 
was operative in other things, is it not effective in the 
heavenly sacraments? Therefore thou hast learned that 
of bread the Body of Christ is made, and that wine and 
water is put into the cup, but it becomes His Blood by the 
consecration ? of the heavenly word." ! 

The parallel between this and the argument in S. Am- 
brose's Of the Mysteries is sufficiently obvious. The 
Church’s act of consecration it is which makes the ele- 
ments to be the Body and Blood of Christ. His words are 
brought into operation by the priest in the Prayer of 
Consecration (which is next to be quoted at length). It 
is particularly to be noted that the writer of the treatise 
ΟἹ the Sacraments does not up to this point even mention 
Christ's words of declaration, “This is My Body," and 
“This is My Blood," which he would most surely have 
done if he had known the later notion of consecration by 
the mere repetition of them.* Nor only so, he dwells so 
emphatically on the utterance of Christ as a command,’ 
that it is plain that he was in entire accord with the tra- 
dition of the whole Church, which, after rehearsing the 
Narrative of the Institution, including, of course, that com- 
mand, “Do this for My memorial," which instituted the 
Eucharist as the perpetual commemorative sacrifice of the 
Christian Church, — presents the elements as the anti- 


! See Appendix, pp. 258-259. + See Appendix, p. 259. 

? Cf. p. 50, note 3. 5 See below, pp. 54-56. 

3 Cf. p. 49, note 3. * See Chapter IV., pp. 146-159. 
1 Cf. p. 52, note 2. 


54 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


types of Christ’s Body and Blood and then prays for their 
acceptance by God, and for His hallowing of them to be 
the sacraments of His Body and Blood. The hidden real- 
ity of the sacraments is effected by the act of consecration, 
which is the instrumental means of carrying into effect the 
precept and the promise of the heavenly words of Christ. 

In the sequel the writer gives a Prayer of Consecra- 
tion! parallel to the preliminary Invocation, the Narrative 
of Institution, the Oblation, and the Invocation proper, 
of the Canon Missae. ΑΙ that he quotes 15 introduced 
by the formula: “The priest says." On the Narrative 
of Institution he comments a little, but what he says is 
strikingly different from what the modern Roman theory 
of Eucharistie consecration would require. This narrative 
is plainly historical in the writer's mind. The“ words" 
of Christ whereby He consecrated the bread and wine to 
be His Body and Blood are, by the strongest kind of im- 
plication, His words (unrecorded by the evangelists) of 
blessing? and just as clearly are His words of declaration 
described as those by which He testified to the gift He gave 
to His disciples; and moreover it is the truth of these words 
for us which we confess, when we reply “ Amen" to the 
priest saying, “The Body of Christ," as he administers 
to us. 

* Dost thou wish to learn that it is consecrated by the 
heavenly words? Receive what these words are. The 
priest says: ‘Make for us,’ quoth he, ‘this oblation ap- 
proved, ratified, reasonable, acceptable: that is a figure 
of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. Who the 
day before He suffered took bread in His holy hands, looked 
up to heaven giving thanks to Thee, Holy Father, Almighty, 

! Book IV., Chap. v., $$ 21-25, and Chap. vi., $$ 26-27. 

? Cf. Chap. IV., pp. 124-125, 127-131, and Appendix, pp. 
360-361. 

? The only words of Christ that come between the act of tak- 


ing the bread or cup, and His testification to His disciples, are 
those indicated and described by the phrase “ He blessed it." 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS δῦ 


Everlasting God, He blessed it, He brake it, and having 
broken it, He delivered it to His Apostles and disciples, say- 
ing: Take and eat ye all of this: for this is My Body, which 
will be broken for many. Likewise also after supper the day 
before he suffered, He took the cup, looked up to heaven 
giving thanks to Thee, Holy Father, Almighty, Everlasting 
God, He blessed it, He delivered it to His Apostles and 
disciples, saying: Take and drink ye all of this; for this is 
My Blood." Look at all those. Those are the evangelist's 
words as far as ‘Take ye,’ be it Body or Blood. Then the 
words are Christ’s: “Take and drink γο all of this; for this 
is My Blood. And look at particulars. “Who the day 
before He suffered,’ guoth he, ‘took bread in His holy 
hands. Before it is consecrated, it is bread: when more- 
over Christ's words have been added! it is Christ's Body. 
And finally hear Him saying: 'Take and eat ye all of it 
for this is My Body.’ And before the words of Christ, 
it is a cup, full of wine and water: when the words of 
Christ have operated, then it is made Christ’s Blood, which 
redeems His people. Therefore ye see how many ways the 
utterance of Christ is powerful to change all kinds of things. 
Then the Lord Jesus Himself bears witness to us that we 
receive His Body and His Blood. Ought we to have any 
doubt concerning His faith and testimony ?” ? 

After a brief digression affirming the superiority of the 
Body of Christ to the manna,’ the writer continues: — 

“Therefore not idly dost thou say: ‘Amen,’ actually 
confessing in thy spirit that thou recelvest the Body of 
Christ. The priest says to thee: ‘The Body of Christ;’ 
and thou sayest: 'Amen, that is, ‘it is truth.” What 
the tongue confesses, let the heart hold fast." * 

Coming back to his quotation of the Prayer of Consecra- 
tion, he proceeds: — 

! His words of blessing —“ He blessed it." 


2 See Appendix, pp. 259-260. 
S IV., ν., 24. Appendix, p. 260. * See Appendix, p. 260. 


δ0 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ἊΝ Then how great a sacrament it is, recognize. 


Look at what He says: 'As often as ye do this, so often 
shall ye make My Memorial, until I come. And the priest. 
says: ‘Therefore being mindful of His most glorious. 
Passion, and His Resurrection from the dead, and His 
Ascension into Heaven, we offer to Thee this spotless. 
offering, a reasonable offering, an unbloody offering, this. 
holy bread and cup of life eternal: and we beseech and 
implore, that Thou wouldest receive this oblation upon Thy 
sublime Altar by the hands of Thy angels, as Thou didst. 
vouchsafe to receive the gifts of Thy righteous servant. 
Abel, and the sacrifice of our forefather Abraham, and 
that which the High-priest Melchizedek offered unto 
Thee.““ ! 

S. John Chrysostom (347-407 A.p.) bears plain witness: 
in many parts of his writings to the uniform tradition of 
the Church. In his treatise Of the Priesthood, after a 
graphic reference to Elijah on Mount Carmel, he proceeds: 
“ Pass then from this scene to the rites now celebrated, and 
you shall see them not only wonderful but transcending 
all astonishment. There stands the priest, not bringing 
down fire but the Holy Spirit, and he makes prolonged 
supplication, not that some flame sent down from on high 
may consume the offerings, but that grace descending 
on the sacrifice, should by means of it enlighten the souls. 
of. 811. 

“And when he invokes the Holy Spirit, and consum- 
mates the most dread sacrifice, tell me, what rank shall 
we give him ?”’? 

In his homilies we may note the following allusions: — 

“What art thou doing, O man, when the priest 
stands before the table, lifting up his hands to heaven, 
invoking the Holy Spirit to come and touch the offered 


! See Appendix, p. 260. 
2 III., 4. See Appendix, p. 261. 
S VI., 4. See Appendix, p. 261. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 51 


gifts? There is a great hush, a great silence. When the 
Spirit is giving His grace, when He comes down, when He 
touches the offered gifts, when you behold the Lamb slain 
and completely offered, is it then that you bring in tumult, 
disturbance, strife and abuse?" ! 

“He that is present is doing nothing, nor is there any- 
thing of human nature in the right disposition of the of- 
fered gifts, but it is the grace of the Spirit being present, 
and coming down upon all, that completes this mystical 
sacrifice." ? 

“The flesh of the Lord because of God the Word is 
bread; so then also this bread because of the overshadow- 
ing of the Holy Spirit, becomes heavenly bread." ? 

In his second homily on the second Epistle to Timothy, 
he identifies (or shows the essential unity of) the original 
institution of the Eucharist and each celebration of it by 
any Christian priest since, emphasizing the fact that God 
works through His ministers. “The offering is the same, 
whether any one you please, or whether Paul or Peter, 
offer it; it is the same, that which Christ gave to the dis- 
ciples, and that which now the priests make. This is no- 
wise inferior to that, because even this men do not hallow, 
but He Himself who has hallowed also that. For as the 
words which God uttered are the same which the priest 
now reads, so also the offering is the same." * We should 
note that there is no hint that Christ's words are repeated 
for the purpose of effecting consecration of the elements 
thereby. Moreover, it is the peculiarity of Christ's dis- 
pensation as remarked in the context, that the Holy 
Spirit has come down. The relation of Christ's words of 
institution to each celebration is brought out clearly in the 
two homilies On the Treason of Judas now to be quoted. 


1 De coem. et cruce, 3. See Appendix, p. 261. 
? In Pent., 1. See Appendix, p. 262. 

3 In Joan., xlv. See Appendix, p. 262. 

* See Appendix, p. 262. 


58 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


“Christ is present, and He who prepared that table, He 
also prepares this. For it is not a man who makes the 
offered gifts to become Christ"s Body and Blood, but Christ 
Himself who was crucified for us. The priest stands ful- 
filling his office, uttering those words; but the power and 
grace are Gods. ‘This is My Body,’ he says; this word 
puts the offered gifts in another rank. And as that word 
saying, ‘Increase and multiply and replenish the earth,’ was 
spoken indeed once for all, but through all time becomes 
effective, giving power to our nature for the procreation of 
children; so also this word once for all spoken, so far as 
each table in our churches is concerned, from that day until 
now and until His coming again, works the perfected 
sacrifice." ! Christ's statement did indeed put the bread 
and wine He presented to His disciples in the first Eucha- 
rist, in another category from the Paschal bread and cup. 
And it is these words as spoken once for all by Christ that 
bear a parallel relation to the creative words at the begin- 
ning of the world. But it is the statement, “ This is My 
Body," as thus spoken by Christ, and not as recited by the 
priest, that becomes effective in the celebration of the 
Eucharist by the Church. The power and grace are of 
God, we are told here, and this power and grace we learn 
from other statements of the same author are obtained at 
each celebration of the Eucharist, by prayer to God for that 
end. The Narrative of Institution was apparently recited 
in the Prayer of Consecration in S. Chrysostom’s time for 
the same reasons as it is to-day with us, to show our 
warrant for celebrating the service, and to show the 
source of the power that consecrates and quickens the 
elements which we offer. 

The second homily repeats the thought in almost the 
same words: “Christ also is now present preparing the 
table. For it is not à man who makes the offered gifts 
to become Christ's Body and Blood. The priest stands 


! See Appendix, pp. 262-263. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 59 


fulfilling his office only, and offers supplication; but the 
grace and the power that accomplish all things are 
God's. “This is My Body,’ he says. This word puts the 
offered gifts in another rank. And as that word saying, 
“Inerease and multiply, and replenish the earth,’ was a 
word and became a work, empowering human nature for 
the procreation of children; so also this word spoken, con- 
tinually makes to grow in grace those who partake worth- 
ily."' We should note that the priest is here described 
as praying, and that the subjective benefit of the sacra- 
ment is also strongly before the writer’s mind. 

Ephraem Syrus (c. 308 A.p.-c. 378) tells us that “ The 
priesthood with confident boldness seeks to rise from earth 
to heaven, until it may behold Him that is invisible; and 
falling down in worship it prays . . . that the Spirit the 
Comforter may come down and hallow the gifts offered on 
earth." ? ] 

The same writer in somewhat similar method to that of 
Chrysostom's homilies On the Treason oj Judas says: “ Do 
not think that this bread and wine which you see, remain 
the same. By no means, brother. Do not believe that. 
By the prayers of the priests and by the coming of the 
Holy Spirit, the bread becomes the Body and the wine the 
Blood [of Christ]. . . . How [ ask is He not able to bring 
it about, that the bread is the very Body and the wine the 
Blood of Christ Himself? In thebeginning He commanded 
the earth to bring forth grass, and therefore to this hour, 
it brings forth grass, by the power of the Divine command 
which it received in the beginning, when the heaven sends 
rain. Now indeed in a similar way, God says, ‘This is My 
Body, this is My Blood,’ and ‘Do this in remembrance of 
Me.' Since therefore all things are aecomplished by His 
Almighty-command until He Himself comes, even as He 
says, ‘Till I come;’ and since when the rain falls upon the 


! See Appendix, p. 263. 
* De Sacerdotio. See Appendix, p. 263. 


00 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


earth, the grass revives: so indeed also this spiritual rain, 
that is the Holy Spirit, coming in answer to the prayers of 
the priests, by His own power makes without doubt this 
bread the Body and the wine the Blood [of Christ." ! 

Again, in commenting upon a vision of Ezekiel he says: . 
“These coals, and the man clothed in linen drawing them 
out and scattering them over the people, are a figure of the 
priests of God, through whom the coals of the living and 
life-giving Body of our Lord are dispensed. Forsooth 
meantime another angel reaches out his hand, takes the 
coals, and forthwith hands them to the man clothed in 
linen. This hints a mystery, that it is not by the priest 
himself that [Christ’s] Body can be made from bread, but 
by Another, that is the Holy Spirit, and that the priest 
as a mediator only lifts his hands, and with his lips offers 
prayers and supplications as an humble servant." ? 

This testimony surely calls for no explanation to make it 
clear. 

Peter II. of Alexandria (T 381 A.p.) speaks of “ The holy 
altar where we invoke the descent of the Holy Spirit." * 

Gregory of Nyssa (330-395 Α.Ρ.) in his sermon On the 
Baptism of Christ, says: “ The bread again is at first com- 
mon bread, but when the sacramental action hallows it, 
it 15 called and becomes Christ's Body. So also the sacra- 
mental oil, so the wine, being of little value before the 
blessing, after the sanctification by the Spirit, each has a 
differing energy." “ 

In his canonical epistle to Letoius, bishop of Melitene, 
he speaks of a penitent who “has as his time of repentance 
his whole lifetime. For never is he thought worthy to 
worship God with the congregation while the sacramental 
prayer is being made; but he will pray apart, a stranger to 
the communion of the holy gifts his whole life."? 

1 De Sanct. et viv. ch. sacr. See Appendix, p. 264. 


2 Ibid., p. 264. 4 Ibid., p. 265. 
3 Ibid., p. 264. 5 Ibid., p. 265. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 61 


In his funeral oration upon Basil, he says: “‘ The priest- 
hood of the teacher copies the pattern of the priesthood of 
Elias, drawing down, in the threefold summoning by the 
word of faith, the heavenly fire upon his sacrifice. And 
we have been taught that the power of the Holy Spirit is 
oftentimes called fire in the scripture." ! 

In his Oratio Catechetica we find additional witness. 
From the thirty-third chapter to the thirty-sixth inclusive 
he treats of Baptism, and makes frequent allusion to prayer 
to God and invocation of His grace as factors in the ap- 
plication of regeneration. Thus he says: “When they 
have heard these things and the like, and have been taught 
the manner, that it is prayer to God and invocation of 
heavenly grace, and water, and faith through which the 
mystery of regeneration is accomplished, they are incredu- 
lous, looking to that which is seen, as if that which operates 
corporeally agreed not with the promise; for how, they 
say, does prayer and invocation of Divine power that is 
made over the water become a source of life to those in- 
itiated?" ? The relation of our prayer to God's grace and 
His promise to give are discussed very thoroughly in 
Chapter thirty-four. Gregory rebuts even the objection 
that God being everywhere does not work specially in 
any particular place or rite. “What difficulty is there 
for the matter in hand, namely, to believe that God is 
every where, and that being in all things, He is present also 
to those who invoke His life-giving power, and that being 
present, He does that which it befits Him to do?" ? 

With this background we can the better see the force of 
the following quotation from the chapter on the Eucharist : 
“For that which is characteristic of all men is acknowl- 
edged also in the case of that flesh, namely that that Body 
too was maintained by bread; which Body also by the 
indwelling of God the Word was raised to the dignity of 
Godhead. Rightly, then, do we believe that now also 


! See Appendix, p. 265. ? Ibid., p. 265. 3 Ibid., p. 266. 


62 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


the bread which is consecrated by the Word of God is 
changed into the Body of God the Word. For that Body 
was virtually bread, but has been consecrated by the in- 
dwelling of the Word that tabernacled in the flesh. There- 
fore from the same cause by which the bread that was 
transformed in that Body was changed to a divine potency, 
a similar result takes place now. For as in that case, the 
grace of the Word used to make holy the Body, the sub- 
stance of which came of the bread, and in a manner was 
itself bread, so also, in this case the bread, as says the 
Apostle, “is consecrated by the Word of God and by 
prayer’; not that it advances by the process of eating to 
become the Body of the Word, but it is at once changed 
into the Body through the Word, as was said by the Word, 
‘This is My Body. . .. Since, then, that God-containing 
Flesh partook also of this part for its substance, and since 
the God who was manifested infused Himself into a perish- 
able nature for this purpose, that by the communion with 
Deity humanity might be deified, for the sake of this, by 
dispensation of His grace, He disseminates Himself in all 
believers through that Flesh composed of bread and wine, 
blending Himself with the body of believers, in order 
that, by this union with that which is immortal, man may 
be a partaker of incorruption. These things He gives by 
the power of the blessing, transforming the nature of the 
visible to that thing." ! 

It is obvious that Gregory rezards the elements to be 
consecrated by the Personal Word (1.6. the Second Person 
of the Holy Trinity), this consecration being granted in 
response to prayer therefor, and being grounded upon 
Christ's own original institution and declaration regarding 
the elements, as consecrated by Himself. 

Theophilus of Alexandria in his Paschal Letter, A.p. 402, 


! Cf. The Rev. J. H. Srawley's edition of the Oratio Catechetica, 
Cambridge, 1903, Introduction, pp. xxxvii, xxxviii; pp. 149-150, 
and 152, notes. See Appendix, p. 266. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 63 


comments as follows upon a dietum of Origen’s: “For 
he says that the Holy Spirit operates not upon those 
things that are inanimate, nor comes upon things that are 
without reason. In making this assertion he does not 
recollect, that in baptism the sacramental waters are con- 
secrated by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit, and 
that the bread of the Lord, in which the Body of the Sav- 
iour is shown, and which we break for our sanctification, 
and the sacred eup (which things are placed upon the 
table of the Church and are so far inanimate), are sancti- 
fied through the invocation and the overshadowing of the 
Holy Spirit." ! 

Nilus (fe. 430 A.D.), in writing to his friend Philip, speaks 
with no uncertain sound: “A sheet of paper made of 
papyrus and size is called mere paper; but when it re- 
ceives the signature of the Emperor, it is named (as is well 
known) a ‘Sacra.’ Sol pray you consider with regard to 
the divine mysteries, that before the supplication of the 
priest and the descent of the Holy Spirit the offered gifts 
are mere bread and common wine; but after those dread 
invocations and the overshadowing of the adorable, and 
life-giving and good Spirit, the elements laid upon the holy 
table are no-longer mere bread and common wine, but the 
Body and Blood, precious and undefiled, of Christ the God 
of all, that cleanse from every spot of sin those that par- 
take with reverence and great devotion." 2 

S. Augustine (354-430 A.p.) in his homilies gives us 
testimony which is in strict accord with that of earlier 
writers. He speaks of the Word of God as sanctifying 
the oblations in a manner that recalls to one’s mind 
S. Ireneus? and the Liturgy of Serapion.* Thus, for 
example, he says: 

“That bread which you see upon the altar, after it has 
been sanctified by the Word of God, is the Body of Christ. 


! See Appendix, p. 267. 3 See above, p. 37. 
2 [bid., p. 267. * Ibid., pp. 41-43. 


64 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


That cup, nay what the cup holds, after it has been sanc- 
tified by the Word of God, is the Blood of Christ." ! 
Shortly after this he outlines the Anaphora thus: 

“You hold the sacraments in their order. First, after 

prayer, you are admonished to have your heart lifted up. 

You respond, We have it unto the Lord“... 

The bishop or presbyter who offers continues, ‘ Let us give 


thanks unto our Lord God.’ . . . And you bear witness, 
‘It is meet and right" . . . Then after the sanctification 
of God's sacrifice . . . when the sanctification has been 


completed, we say the Lord's Prayer." 

In another sermon he places the act of consecration upon 
the part of Christ at the institution in His blessing of the 
elements. “For He Himself, as His passion was drawing 
nigh, when He celebrated the Passover with His dis- 
ciples, blessed the bread He had taken, and said: ‘This is 
My Body which will be given for you. Likewise the cup 
which He had blessed He gave saying: ‘This is My Blood 
of the New Testament, which will be poured out for the 
remission of sins. "? 

In another homily he speaks of the consecration in terms 
that suggest the Epiklesis in Serapion's Liturgy very 
plainly. “That which you see is bread and wine; but 
that bread and this wine by the coming of the Word 
become the Body and Blood of the Word.” ὃ 

In the same sermon he also says: — 

“And then [there follow] what things are done in the 
holy prayers, which you are about to hear, that by the 
coming of the Word it may become the Body and Blood of 
Christ. Fortake away the Word, it is but bread and wine. 
Add the Word, and actually it is something else. And 
what is that something else? The Body of Christ and the 
Blood of Christ. Take away the Word, it is but bread and 


! Hom. 227, in die Pasch., iv. See Appendix, pp. 267-268. 
? Serm. ined., III., De Sacr. alt. ad inf. See Appendix, p. 268. 
3 Ibid., VI. See Appendix, p. 268. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 65 


wine. Add the Word, and it will become the sacrament. 
To this you say, Amen. Tosay Amen is to give assent. 
Amen in Latin is translated Verum." The coming of the 
Word to take a special relation to the elements is here 
plainly noted, and the Amen at the end of the Prayer of 
Consecration, 1.6. the prayer that the Word will come to 
sanctify the oblation. S. Augustine also speaks of the 
prayers made when the Eucharist is consecrated, in his 
Epistle to Paulinus. “I prefer by these words to under- 
stand this, that all or nearly all the Church is met to- 
gether; so that we take as the supplications mentioned, 
those which we make in the celebration of the sacrament, 
before that which is on the Lord's table begins to be 
blessed; prayers, when it is being blessed and sanctified, 
and broken for distribution; which entire petition almost 
the whole Church concludes with the Lord's Prayer.” ! 
Again in his treatise On the Trinity, he says: “ We call that 
the Body and Blood of Christ, which taken from the fruits 
of the earth and consecrated by the mystical prayer, we 
duly receive to our spiritual health in remembrance of the 
Lord's passion on our behalf. And this though it is 
brought to its visible form by the hand of men, is not 
consecrated to be so great a sacrament, save by the unseen 
operation of the Spirit of God." This last extract is 
surely too plain to need comment.? 

Jerome (345-420 A.p.), in writing to Evangelus, asks, 
“For since the Apostle clearly teaches that presbyters are 
the same as bishops, why is the minister of tables and of 
widows suffered to set himself up arrogantly over those, 
at whose prayers the Body and Blood of Christ are con- 
secrated?" * Again, in his commentary on Zephaniah, he 
says, “ The priests also who serve the Eucharist and dis- 
tribute the Lord's Blood to His people, act wickedly against 
the law of Christ in thinking that it is the words of him 
that prays which makes the Eucharist, and not the life, 


" See Appendix, pp. 268-269.  Ibid., p. 269. 3 Ibid., p. 269. 


06 THE ΟΟΝΡΕΟΒΑΤΙΟΝ OF THE EUCHARIST 


and that a solemn prayer alone is necessary and not the 
merits of the priests, of whom it is said, ‘Let not the priest 
in whom is a blemish approach to offer oblations to God.’ " ! 

The Greek Jerome (fl. c. 400 A.p.) says, ‘‘ The Christian 
is fully persuaded that he partakes not of mere bread and 
wine, but truly the Body and Blood of the Son of God, 
when they have been hallowed by the Holy Spirit." ? 

S. Isidore of Pelusium (f c. 434 a.p.) asks, “If our 
God and Saviour incarnate delivered that the Holy Spirit 
is the complement of the divine Trinity, and that He is 
numbered with the Father and the Son in the Invocation 
of holy baptism, as freeing from sins, and that at the mys- 
tical table He makes the common bread the very Body 
of His (i.e. Christ's) incarnation; how do you teach, most 
foolish one, that the Holy Spirit is made or created or of ἃ 
servant's nature, and not coóriginate and consubstantial 
with the Almighty and Creating and Royal Essence?" ? 
In another letter he says: “ Do not despise the divine lit- 
urgy, do not contemn the consecration of the fruits. . . . 
But remembering how the Divine Spirit makes Christ's 
Blood the first-fruit of this, so use it because of thy weak- 
ness." A 

S. Cyril of Alexandria (T 444 A.p.), in commenting on 
S. Luke xxii. 19, says: “ He gives thanks, that is He dis- 
courses in the form of a prayer with God the Father, 
showing that He is the joint giver and approver of the 
life-giving blessing about to be given to us. For every 
grace and every perfect gift comes to us from the Father 
throush the Son by the Holy Spirit. And what was done 
was a pattern to us ourselves of the prayer that ought to be 
put up, if the grace of the mystical and life-giving oblation 
is to be presented; which thing indeed we are also wont to 
do."* In other words, Christ's example is the Church’s 


! See Appendix, pp. 269-270. 3 Ibid., p. 270. 
A Ibid.,.p. 240. * Ibid., p. 270. 
5 Ibid., pp. 270-271. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 67 


model in the consecration of the Eucharist. With this we 
may compare his comment on S. Luke ix. 16, “ He looks 
up to heaven, that is asking for a blessing from above." ! 
There is an analogy between the Eucharist and the pro- 
totypical miracles of feeding the four thousand and the 
five thousand, in the prayer put up by Christ to His Father 
for the end desired in either case. In his comment on 
S. John vi. 11, we find much the same thought expressed. 
“So also here it is to be understood that He uttered a bless- 
ing over the loaves. It is to be noted that instead of ‘He 
gave thanks,’ Matthew said ‘ He blessed’; but by no means 
will there be difference of meaning in the versions of the 
[two] saints. For by way of proof there is Paul using 
both together and saying that ‘All food is good and not to 
be rejected if it be received with thanksgiving; for it is 
hallowed by the word of God and prayer. For that is 
altogether blessed which is hallowed by prayer in suppli- 
cation, which prayer we are continually wont to make at 
thetables."? In his comment on S. Matt. xxvi. 26 he says, 
“At the same time also giving us a pattern, first to give 
thanks, and so to break the bread and distribute it. 
Therefore also we, having placed the offered gifts before 
God, entreat at length for the transformation of the 
spiritual blessing, that having partaken of them we may 
be hallowed both bodily and spiritually." * In his second 
cecumenical letter to Nestorius, he gives us another allusion 
to the Oblation and Invocation in the liturgy. “ Having 
proclaimed the death aecording to the flesh of the only- 
begotten Son of God, that is, Jesus Christ and confess- 
ing both His reviving from the dead, and His ascension 
into heaven, we consecrate the bloodless sacrifice in the 
churches, and thus we come to the mystical blessings, and 
we are hallowed having become partakers of the holy Flesh 
and of the precious Blood of Christ the Saviour of us all." * 


! See Appendix, p. 271. S Ibid., p. 271. 
ια. p. 271. * Ibid., p. 271. 


05 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Proclus (T ο. 447 A.D.) says, “ By such prayers they were 
awaiting the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit, in order 
that by His Divine presence He might make and declare 
the bread and the wine mixed with water that had been 
offered for consecration, the Body and Blood of our Saviour 
Jesus Christ." ! 

Gaudentius of Brescia (fl. c. 420 a.p.) says: “Do not 
think that to be earthly which is made heavenly by Him 
Who came upon it and made it His Body and Blood. . . . 
That is made what it is proclaimed to be by the fire of the 
Divine Spirit, that you may believe that what you receive 
is the Body of that heavenly Bread and the Blood of that 
sacred Vine. For when He offered the consecrated bread 
and wine to His disciples, thus He said, ‘This is My Body, 
this is My Blood. "? 

Theodoret of Cyrus (f 458 a.p.), in the second of his 
theologieal Dialogues between the Orthodox and the 
Eclectic Christian, has the following passage: — 

“Ὁ. Tell me now; the mystical symbols which are 
offered to God by those who act as priests, of what things 
are they the symbols? 

E. Of the Body and Blood of the Lord. 

O. Of the real Body or not? 

E. Ofthe real. 

O. Very good. For there must be the archetype of the 
likeness. And this is true, for painters imitate nature and 
draw the likenesses of visible things. 

E. True. 

O. If then, the divine mysteries are antitypes of the real 
Body, therefore also now the Body of the Lord is a Body, 
not changed into the nature of Godhead, but filled with 
Divine glory. 

E. You have brought in the subject of the divine mys- 
teries at an opportune moment, for from it I will show 


! See Appendix, p. 272. 2 Ibid., p. 272. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 69 


you the change of the Lord’s Body into another nature. 
Answer now to my questions. 

O. I will answer. 

E. What do you call the offered gift, before the priestly 
invocation ? 

Ο. I must not say openly ; for perhaps some of the 
uninitiated are present. 

E. Let the answer be enigmaticaliy given. 

Ο. Food from such and such grains. 

E. And how do we name the other symbol ? 

O. Common also is this name, signifying a kind of 
drink. 

E. But after the consecration, how do you name these? 

O. Christ's Body and Christ's Blood. 

E. And do you believe that you partake of Christ's 
Body and Blood? 

O. I do believe so. 

E. And then the symbols of the Lord’s Body and Blood, 
are one thing before the priestly invocation, but after the 
invocation are changed and become other; so the Lord’s 
Body after its taking up, is changed into the divine sub- 
stance. 

O. You are caught in the nets you have woven. For 
after the consecration the mystical symbols do not depart 
from their own nature; for they remain in their former 
substance, and figure and form, and they are visible and 
tangible, such as they were before. But they are re- 
garded as what they are become, and believed to be, and 
are worshipped as being what they are believed to be."! 

This witness to the belief of the early ages of the Church 
regarding the consecration of the Eucharist is of all the 
more value because of its incidental character. It shows 
beyond shadow of doubt that not only the orthodox, but 
also the heretical Christians were entirely at one in teach- 
ing and practising, that the elements offered in the Liturgy 

! See Appendix, pp. 272-273. 


70 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


were never regarded as consecrated until after the prayer 
of the Invocation. 

To the middle of this same century (fifth) may be as- 
signed the witness of the Anaphora of S. James, so far as 
that which is common to the text of both the Greek and 
the Syriae (Monophysite) versions are concerned. The 
differences are merely verbal, an epithet or phrase added 
in one or the other without touching the common pat- 
tern and meaning and wording, which tell but one story as 
to consecration by the Epiklesis of the Holy Spirit. 

We may then, without misrepresentation of any vital 
matter, quote from that part of the Greek which corre- 
sponds to our Prayer of Consecration, as follows :— 

“Lastly Thou didst send into the world Thine only- 
begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, that He might come 
and renew and restore Thine image: who coming down 
from heaven, and being incarnate of the Holy Ghost and 
Mary the Virgin and Theotokos, and having had His con- 
versation with men, accomplished all the economy for the 
salvation of our race; and being about to undergo His 
willing and life-giving death upon the cross, the Sinless for 
us sinners, in the night wherein He was betrayed, or rather 
gave Himself up, for the life and salvation of the world, 

then the priest taking the bread in his hand says 
taking the bread in His holy and spotless and pure and im- 
mortal hands, looking up to heaven and dedicating it to 
Thee His God and Father, He gave thanks, and hallowed, 
and brake and gaveto His holy disciplesand apostlessaying, 
the deacons say 
Unto remission of sins and life eternal. 
then aloud ἡ 
Take eat: this is My Body which is broken for you and 
given for remission of sins. 
! What is common to both is surely anterior to the schism. Cf. 


Church Quarterly Review,Vol. X XIX., No. 58 (January, 1890), p. 372. 
? Cf. Brightman, Lit. E. and W., Vol. I., pp. 86-89, 97a, 99. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 171 


the people 
Amen. 
then he takes the cup and says by himself 

Likewise after supper taking the cup and mixing it with 
wine and water, and looking up to heaven, dedicating 
it to Thee His God and Father, He gave thanks, hallowed, 
blessed, filled it with the Holy Ghost, and gave to His holy 
and blessed disciples saying, 

then aloud 
Drink ye all of this: this is My Blood of the New Covenant, 
which for you and for many is shed and distributed for 
remission of sins. 

the people 

Amen. 
Do this in remembrance of Me: for as often as ye eat this 
bread and drink this cup, ye proclaim the death of the Son 
of Man, and confess His resurrection until He come. 
the deacons say 
We believe and we confess. 

the people 
Thy death O Lord we proclaim and Thy resurrection we 
confess. 

the priest subjoins a prayer 

Therefore also we sinners remembering His life-giving 
sufferings, His saving cross and death and burial, His 
resurrection from the dead the third day, His ascension into 
heaven, and session at the right hand of Thee, His God and 
Father, and His glorious and terrible second appearing, 
when He shall come with glory to judge quick and dead, 
when He shall render to each according to his works; . . . 
offer to Thee O Lord this terrible and unbloody sacrifice, 
beseeching Thee, that Thou wilt not deal with us after our 
sins, nor reward us according to our iniquities, but ac- 
cording to Thy kindness and tender compassion, passing 
over and blotting out the handwriting that is against us, 
Thy suppliants, wouldst grant us Thy heavenly and eternal 


72 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


gifts, which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath 
it entered the heart of man, what Thou O God hast pre- 
pared for those who love Thee; and reject not Thy people 
because of me and of my sins, O Lord and Lover of men 
the priest three times 
For Thy people and Thy Church supplicate Thee. 
the people 
Have mercy upon us, Ο Lord God, Father Almighty. 
again the priest says 
Have mercy upon us O God Almighty; have mercy upon 
us O God our Saviour, have mercy upon us after Thy great 
mercy and send upon us and upon these gifts placed before 
Thee, Thy all-holy Spirit, 
then bowing his head he says 
the Lord and Lifegiver, sharer of the throne and of the 
kingdom with Thee, God and Father, and with Thy only- 
begotten Son, consubstantial and coeternal, Who spake 
in the Law and in the Prophets, and in Thy New Covenant, 
Who came down in the form of a dove upon our Lord Jesus 
Christ in the river Jordan, and abode upon Him, Who came 
down upon Thy holy apostles in the form of fiery tongues 
in the upper room of the holy and glorious Sion on the day 
of the holy pentecost. 
and rising, he says by himself 
Send down O Lord Thy all-holy Spirit upon us and upon 
the holy gifts placed before Thee, 
aloud 
That overshadowing them with His holy and good and 
glorious presence, He may hallow and make this bread 
the holy Body of Christ 
the people 
Amen. 
the priest aloud 
And this cup the precious Blood of Christ, 
the people 
Amen. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 73 


then standing, he says by himself 

That they may be to all those partaking of them, for re- 
mission of sins and life eternal, for hallowing of souls and 
bodies, for bringing forth the fruit of good works," etc.! 

The Nestorian Liturgy of Addai and Mari, the antiquity 
of which carries us back to the early part of the fifth cen- 
tury, is most remarkable in that it omits the Narrative 
of Institution entirely. This goes to show the relation 
which that recital held in the minds of the early Church 
to the celebration of the Eucharist. Being employed his- 
torically there, it is not absolutely necessary that it be 
recited at all, and hence probably its omission in this case. 
At the present time, however, the Narrative of Institution 
is inserted into this Liturgy in practice. The Invocation 
contained in this ancient Liturgy is of the implicit variety. 
It is as follows: “And we also, O my Lord (repeat three 
times), thy weak and frail and miserable servants who are 
gathered together in thy name, both stand before thee at 
this time and have received the example which is from thee 
delivered unto us, rejoicing and praising and exalting and 
commemorating and celebrating this great and fearful and 
holy and life-giving and divine mystery of the passion 
and the death and the burial and the resurrection of our 
Lord our Saviour Jesus Christ. 

the priest rises and elevates his hands and says 

AND MAY THERE COME, O MY LORD, thine Holy 
Spirit and rest upon this offering of thy servants and bless 
it and hallow it that it be to us, O my Lord, for the par- 
don of offences and the remission of sins and for the great 
hope of resurrection from the dead and for new life in the 
kingdom of heaven with all those who have been well pleas- 
ing in thy sight," ete.? 

The Abyssinian Anaphora of our Lord is of about the 
same date (early fifth century), and is also a witness worthy 

! See Appendix, pp. 273-276. 

2 See Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Vol. I., p. 287. 


74 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


of our attention. We will quote from the beginning of the 
Narrative of Institution. “In that night in which they 
betrayed Him He took bread into His hands holy blessed 
and without spot, He gave thanks, He blessed, He brake 
and gave to His disciples, saying: Take, eat, this bread 
is My body which is broken for you for the forgiveness of 
sins; and when ye shall have done this, make a commemo- 
ration of Me. Likewise also the cup of wine after they 
had supped, mixing, giving thanks, blessing and sanctify- 
ing, Thou didst give to them, Thy true blood which was 
shed for our sins. 

* Now, therefore, O Lord, we remember Thy death and 
resurrection, we trust in Thee, and offer to Thee bread and 
the eup, giving thanks to Thee, to Thee alone who [art] 
the Saviour, God from eternity, since Thou hast com- 
manded us to stand before Thee and to serve Thee as priests. 
Therefore we also Thy servants, O Lord, ask Thee, O Lord, 
and beseech Thee to send the Holy Spirit and power 
upon this bread and this cup, [that] He may make it the 
body and blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, 
world without end."! 

This is somewhat clumsily worded ; our Lord Jesus Christ 
is prayed to instead of the Father, and at the same time 
His Body and Blood are spoken of in the third person. 
Nevertheless the testimony presented to us by this crude 
relie is absolutely at one with all that has preceded it. 

Pope Gelasius I. (| 496 A.p.), in his Epistle to Elpidius, 
asks, “How shall the heavenly Spirit who has been in- 
voked come for the consecration of the Divine mystery, if 
the priest also who implores that He be present, is con- 
sidered guilty as being full of criminal deeds ?"? 

Fulgentius of Ruspe (f 533 Α.Ρ.) has very interesting 
and most pertinent witness to give us. He discusses the 


! See Cooper and Maclean, The Testament of Our Lord, Edin- 
burgh, 1902, Appendix, I., p. 247. . 
? See Appendix, pp. 276-277. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 75 


question, “ Why the Holy Spirit alone is asked for to con- 
secrate the oblation ?” 

“Now indeed also this question about the sending of the 
Holy Spirit must be considered by us: why forsooth, if the 
sacrifice is offered to the whole Trinity, is the sending of the 
Holy Spirit to sanctify the gift of our oblation asked for, 
as if in fact, that I may so speak, God the Father Himself, 
from whom the Spirit proceeds, cannot sanctify the sac- 
rifice offered to Him; or that the Son Himself is unable to 
sanctify the sacrifice of His Body, which we offer, when 
He himself sanctified His Body which He offered, that He 
might redeem us; or that so the Holy Spirit must be sent to 
consecrate the Church’s sacrifice, as though the Father or 
the Son were wanting to those offering the sacrifice?"! 

“So also in the sending or overshadowing of the Holy 
Spirit no local motion on His part is to be understood, but 
the effecting of our consecration is to be believed."? 

“Since therefore as we have said the whole Trinity in the 
unity of Its Godhead naturally remains in Its boundless 
infinity, and thus is nowhere present locally, so that 
nevertheless It is nowhere absent, and is so present every- 
where in Its entirety, that neither through the parts of the 
whole creation is by parts divided, nor is shut up within 
the completeness of the whole creation, — as often as the 
Holy Spirit is asked from the Father to consecrate the 
sacrifice; the first rationale of faith and the first caution 
to be held by all Christians for their own benefit, is that 
the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit is by no means to be 
reckoned or thought to be local." ὃ 

“When moreover does Holy Church (which is the Body 
of Christ) more fittingly demand the overshadowing of the 
Holy Spirit than to consecrate the sacrifice of Christ's 
Body?" 

‘Ad Mon. II., 6. See Appendix, p. 277. 
2 Ibid. See Appendix, p. 277. 


8 Ibid., 7. See Appendix, p. 277. 
4 Ibid., 10. See Appendix, p. 278. 


76 THE CONSECRATION OF ΤΗΕ EUCHARIST 


“Learn therefore what is done in the offering of the 
sacrifices, that thence you may understand, why the over- 
shadowing of the Holy Spirit is requested there. Forsooth 
that is fulfilled in the offering of the sacrifices, which the 
blessed Apostle testifies that the Saviour Himself com- 
manded, saying: “That the Lord Jesus, in the night in 
which He was betrayed,’ etc. (1 Cor. xi. 23-26). And so 
therefore the sacrifice is offered that the death of the Lord 
may be proclaimed, and a commemoration be made of Him 
who laid down His life. . . . Since therefore Christ died 
for us by reason of His love for us, when in the time of the 
sacrifice we make commemoration of His death, we de- 
mand that love be bestowed upon us through the over- 
shadowing of the Holy Spirit. . . . And so the Holy 
Spirit sanctifies the sacrifice of the Church, and therefore 
the Christian people remain in faith and love.’’? 

“ And so the Holy Spirit, who gives the Church love and 
preserves it, sanctifies both the sacrifice and baptism by 
the operation of His Divine power." ? 

These brief extracts show the background of a universal 
practice, namely, the consecration of the Eucharist by the 
prayer of the Church to that end, which practice 15 at once 
based upon the right belief in the relations of the several 
Persons of the Trinity to each other, and at the same time 
serves as a handy proof or illustration of that faith. 

Some extracts from a homily ascribed to Cesarius of 
Arles (470-542 a.p.) next claim our attention. As they 
are sometimes erroneously supposed to favour the modern 
Roman theory of Eucharistie consecration, it is important 
for us to see just what is said. 

“Therefore let all doubtfulness of unbelief depart, since 
He who is the author of the gift is Himself the witness of 
the truth. For the invisible priest by His secret power 
changes visible creatures into the substance of His Body 

! Frag., xxviii., Contra Fab. See Appendix, p. 278. 
? Frag., xxix., Ibid. See Appendix, p. 278. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS (4 


and Blood, thus saying: ‘Take and eat, this is My Body.’ 
And the sanctification having been repeated: ‘Take and 
drink, this is My Blood.’ Therefore just as at the be- 
hest of the Lord who gave the command, suddenly out 
of nothingness came into being the heights of heaven, 
the depths of the sea, the expanses of the land, with equal 
powerfulness in the spiritual sacraments the Might of the 
Word gives the command, and the accomplishment of the 
thing [commanded] complies. Therefore how great and 
renowned benefits the power of the Divine blessing effects, 
in what manner it ought not to be a thing novel and im- 
possible to thee, that earthly and transitory things are 
changed into the substance of Christ, ask thyself who hast 
been regenerated in Christ." 1 

In this it is plainly intimated that Christ testified by His 
declaration after His act of consecration that He gave 
His Body and Blood. His command is still effective 
to perform the same, through the power of the Divine 
blessing. Any statement to the effect that Christ Himself 
consecrated by means of His declaration or that He bade 
His followers to consecrate by means of a mere repetition 
of that declaration, is most significantly not made, nor 
is such a notion even so much as hinted at. A little later 
in this homily we are told: — 

“When the creatures that are to be blessed with the 
heavenly words are placed upon the altar, before the invo- 
cation of the Holy Name the substance there is of bread 
and wine; after Christ's words however it is the Body and 
Blood of Christ." ? 

The instrumental means of Eucharistie consecration 
upon the part of the Church are the heavenly words where- 
by God's Holy Name is invoked for the hallowing of the 
'oblations. Before this the elements are mere bread and 
wine. After this they are to be reckoned the Body and 
Blood of Christ. The writer, however, leaves this to be 


! See Appendix, pp. 278-279. ? Ibid., p. 279. 


78 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


supplied in the mind of his auditor, and leaps back to the 
original institution, when it was after Christ’s words of 
declaration that the disciples first knew what it was that He 
proffered them. A fragment of the Gallican Liturgy may 
be quoted here which serves to illustrate the fact that 
Csesarius was in touch with the rest of the Church 
Catholic in the rationale of Eucharistie consecration. We 
are given only the last words of the Post Sanctus followed 
by the opening words of the Narrative, which last is not 
given at length, and then the Post Pridie, which unfor- 
tunately is not complete. The portion, however, speaks 
for itself. 

“Through our Lord, Who the day before He suffered[ete.] 
We beseech Thee most merciful Father, through the in- 
vocation of Thy name and the pouring out of Thy Holy 
Spirit upon all creatures, let this creature be made. . .."'! 

Abruptly as this breaks off, it affords a clue to the posi- 
tion and phraseology of the Invocation of the Holy Name 
mentioned by the homilist. The witness of the Western 
non-Roman rites will be considered more fully later.? 

Pope Gregory the Great (f 604 A.p.) in his Epistle to 
John of Syracuse says: 

“We say the Lord's Prayer indeed soon after the Prayer 
[οἵ Consecration], becauseit wasthe custom of the Apostles, 
that at that very prayer alone they consecrated the host 
of the oblation, and it seemed to me very unfitting, that 
we should say the Prayer [of Consecration] (which a 
scholar composed), over the oblation, and that we should 
not say that very tradition which our Redeemer composed, 
over His Body and Blood." ? 

It is to be noted that he speaks of the Prayer of Con- 
secration as being said over the oblation, and then inas- 
much as the oblation would be consecrated after that had 
been said, the Lord's Prayer is spoken of as being said 


! See Appendix, p. 279. ? See Chap. IV., pp. 115-122. 
3 See Appendix, p. 280. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 79 


over Christ's Body and Blood. A clear testimony, surely, 
is this to the Catholie tradition as to the rationale of 
Eucharistie consecration. 

S. Gregory is quoted by his biographer, Paul Winifred, 
as having said to a woman who doubted that bread which 
she had made could become the Body of Christ :— 

“Our Creator knowing our weaknesses beforehand, by 
that power, by which He made all things out of nothing, 
and fashioned for Himself a Body out of the flesh of the 
ever-virgin by the operation of the Holy Spirit, changes 
bread and wine mixed with water, their appearance 
remaining the same, into His own Flesh and Blood at the 
Catholie prayer, for our salvation, by the hallowing power 
of His Spirit." ! 

Eusebius of Alexandria (c. 560 A.D.) says, “ Many pres- 
byters, being sinners, offer the gifts, and God does not 
reject them, but consecrates and magnifies the oblations by 
His Holy Spirit." ? 

Eutychius of Constantinople (f 582 A.p.) speaks of the 
elements at the offertory as “ Brought in and not yet con- 
secrated through the high-priestly invocation and the hal- 
lowing lightening upon them." ? 

Anastasius Sinaita (f 598 or Tf 610 a.p.) asks: “What 
are you doing, O man? The priest is offering the unbloody 
sacrifice on your behalf to the Lord, and do you despise it ? 
The priest is contending on your behalf: as in a reverend 
court of justice, so standing at the altar, he pleads and 
urges that the grace of the Holy Spirit overshadow you, 
and are you not mindful for his salvation?" * 

John Moschus (f 620 a.p.) tells us, in his Spiritual 
Meadow, of an occasion on which a certain Abbot John, 
afterward bishop of Cxsarea, did not behold the Holy 
Spirit descend upon the oblations as he was wont to do, 
and was told by an angel that they had already been con- 


! See Appendix, pp. 280-281. 3 Ibid., pp. 279-280. 
2 Ibid., p. 279. 4 Ibid., p. 280. 


50 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


secrated, by the repetition of the Anaphora over them by a 
brother who had been sent after them." He also tells 
another story of a bishop who began the Prayer of Conse- 
eration four times but could not finish it, as he did not see 
the Holy Spirit come down as he was accustomed to do.? 

The next witness summoned is from the West. S. 
Isidore of Seville ( 638 A.p.) says, “The words of the 
Lord uttered in the sacred ministration by the priest, 
namely, “This is My Body,’ are of the substance of the 
sacrament."? That is to say, they are its foundation or 
charter. For S. Isidore gives us a definition of “ sacrifice" 
which shows the same use in Spain as elsewhere at this 
time, namely, the consecration of the Eucharist by the 
prayer in the Liturgy for that purpose. “A sacrifice is 
so called as being made holy, because by the mystical 
prayer it is consecrated for a memorial of the Lord’s pas- 
sion on our behalf, whence we call this Christ’s Body and 
Blood, by His command, which, though it is of the fruits 
of the earth, is sanetified and becomes the sacrament, 
by the unseen working of the Spirit of God." “ 

When S. Isidore comes to describe the Liturgy we find 
his testimony most striking. In fact the parallel between 
his description and that of S. Cyril of Jerusalem, nearly 
three centuries earlier, is remarkable. It is abundantly 

1 Ch. xxv. See Appendix, p. 281. 

? Ch. cl. See Appendix, pp. 281-282. 

3 Epistle VII.; see Appendix, p. 283. It is highly probable that 
this Epistle was writen long after S. Isidore’s day, as the contro- 
versy regarding leavened and unleavened bread between East and 
West had not as yet arisen, and this Epistle treats of it as a present 
issue. As the part guoted is sometimes urged by supporters of 
the modern Roman theory of consecration, it has been admitted 
into the text in order to be as fair as possible; yet as a matter of 
fact it does not say at all what they would wish it to, and even if 
it were absolutely genuine, it could not be pressed to signify more 
than it is shown to mean above, in view of the universal liturgical 
tradition of the Church. 

* Originum, VI. 19. See Appendix, p. 283. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 81 


evident that the Invocation is the important factor in the 
consecration of the Eucharist, and that S. Isidore had never 
heard of there being more than one use in all Christendom 
in this particular. It is noteworthy that he does not men- 
tion the Narrative of Institution in his description of the 
“seven prayers of the sacrifice." 

“Now the order of the mass and of the prayers by 
which the sacrifices offered to God are consecrated, was 
first instituted by S. Peter, and its celebration the whole 
world performs in one and the same manner. 

“The first of these is an address of admonition toward 
the people that they may be aroused to pray God. 

“The second is of invocation to God that He may gra- 
ciously accept the prayers of the faithful and their obla- 
tions. 

“The third is poured out for the offerers or for the faith- 
ful departed that through the same sacrifice they may 
attain pardon. 

“ The fourth is introduced after these for the kiss of peace, 
that all having been reconciled to each other in love, may 
be joined together worthily by the sacrament of the Body 
and Blood of Christ, because Christ’s indivisible Body 
does not admit of dissension of any kind. 

“ The fifth next is introduced, a preface to the sanctifiea- 
tion of the oblation, in which also the whole universe of 
earthly creatures and heavenly powers is summoned to the 
praise of God, and Hosanna in the highest is sung, be- 
cause when ἃ Saviour of the house of David was born, 
salvation came to the world even to the heights. 

“Next after this follows the sixth, the conformation of 
the sacrament, in order that the oblation, which is offered 
to God, having been sanctified by the Holy Spirit, may be 
conformed to Christ's Body and Blood. 

“The last of these is the prayer, whereby our Lord taught 
His disciples to pray, saying: Our Father, who art in 
heaven. . . . These then are the seven prayers of the 


82 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


sacrifice commended by evangelical and Apostolic teaching, 
the rationale of which number seems to have been insti- 
tuted either on account of the ‘seven-characterized’ com- 
munity of holy Church, or on account of the seven-fold 
Spirit of grace, by whose gift those things which are 
offered are sanctified." ! 

James of Edessa (640-708 A.D.) in his epistle to Thomas 
the Presbyter describes the celebration of the Divine 
Liturgy according to the Syriac Jacobite rite, in con- 
siderable detail. It is noteworthy that he makes no 
mention of the Narrative of Institution, not even when 
treating of the Anaphora itself, as the following extract 
will show: — 

“And after this the priest says to the people Lift up 
your hearts: the people answer him Our hearts are with the 
Lord. And moreover he cries aloud to them Let us give 
thanks unto the Lord: and they answer him What thou 
hast said is meet and right. 

Ἧς And whereas the priest and the people have 
meetly accounted it right to give thanks unto the Lord, he 
says It is meet and right to praise Thee and in a few words 
commemorates the whole scope of the grace of God as 
touching man and his first creation and his redemption 
thereafter and as touching the dispensation which Christ 
wrought in our behalf when he suffered for us in the flesh: 
for this is the whole kuröbho — that we should com- 
memorate and declare the things which Christ wrought in 
our behalf. 

* He supplicates also for the descent of the Holy Ghost." ? 

In a fragment ascribed to him we are also told: “Then 
[1.6. after the Sanctus] he commemorates the dispensation 
of the Lord and the giving of the mysteries, and he signs 


! De Eccl. Off., 1., 15. See Appendix, pp. 282-283. This is 
repeated almost verbatim by the epistle of Etherius and Beatus 
to Elipandus (P. L., xevi., 939-940). 

2 Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Vol. I., pp. 491-492. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS © 83 


over the oblation three crosses and three over the chalice, 
and as from out the mouth of the Lord he says: ‘Do ye be 
making My memorial,’ and they [the people] reply: “We 
are mindful.’ Then he prays over the people: then most 
humbly he prays, that the Holy Ghost may come and per- 
fect the Eueharist; then he commemorates those whom 
he ought." ! 

The Venerable Bede (| 735 A.p.) in one of his homilies 
says, “ And so He [Christ] washes us daily from our sins 
in His Blood, when the memorial of His blessed Passion is 
renewed, when the creature of bread and wine is trans- 
formed into the sacrament of His Flesh and Blood by the 
ineffable sanctification of the Spirit." ? 

John Damascene (c. 685-765 a.p.) in his Exposition of 
the Orthodox Faith, writing evidently with S. Chrysostom"s 
statements in mind, elucidates the relation of Christ’s 
words of institution and also that of the Invocation to the 
consecration of the Eucharist. This passage must be 
guoted at some length. 

“If then the Word of God is living and energizing, and 
the Lord made all whatsoever He willed: if He said, Let 
there be light,’ and there was light, ‘Let there be a firma- 
ment, and there was a firmament; if by the Word of the 
Lord the heavens were established and their whole host 
by the breath of His mouth; if the heaven and the earth, 
water and fire and air and the whole adornment of them, 
and man indeed this most famous living being, were per- 
fected by the Word of the Lord; if the Word of His own 
will became man and took to Himself flesh of the pure and 
undefiled blood of the holy ever-virgin One without the 
aid of seed, can He not make the bread His Body, and the 
wine and water, His Blood?  Hesaid in the beginning, Let 
the earth bring forth grass, and even until now, when the 
rain comes it brings forth its proper fruits, urged on and 


* Quoted by Hoppe, Die Epiklesis, etc., pp. 28-29, note 55. 
? See Appendix, p. 287. 


84 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


empowered by the divine command. God said, ‘This is My 
Body, and “This is My Blood,’ and ‘This do ye in remem- 
brance of Me,’ and by His All-powerful command it comes 
to pass, until He come; for thus He said, until He come. 
And the overshadowing power of the Holy Spirit becomes 
through the Invocation the rain to this new tillage. For 
as God made all whatsoever He made by the energy of the 
Holy Spirit, so also now the energy of the Spirit works 
those things that are above nature and which nothing save 
only faith can comprehend. ‘How shall this be,’ said the 
holy Virgin, “since I know not a man?" The archangel 
Gabriel answered, “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, 
and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee. And 
now do you ask, how the bread becomes Christ's Body 
and the wine and water, Christ's Blood? 1 indeed say 
to you, The Holy Spirit descends and does these things 
that are beyond reason and thought. . . . A Body truly 
united to the Godhead is the Body taken of the holy Virgin; 
not that the very Body received up comes down from 
heaven, but that the bread and the wine are changed into 
God's Body and Blood. If you inquire the manner, how it 
comes about, it is enough for you to learn that it isthrough 
the Holy Spirit, just as also the Lord took upon Himself 
flesh of the holy Theotokos through the Holy Spirit. And 
nothing further do we know, but that the Word of God is 
true, and energizing, and all-powerful, but the manner is 
unsearchable. Better is it to say this: that just as physi- 
cally the bread through eating, and the wine and water 
through drinking, are changed into the body of the one 
eating and drinking, and do not become a different body 
from the former one; so the bread of the prothesis and the 
wine and water, through the Invocation and the descent 
of the Holy Spirit are supernaturally changed into Christ's 
Body and Blood, and are not two but one and the same." ! 

In a homily he says: “ Let us partake of the Lamb of the 


! IV., 13. See Appendix, pp. 283-285. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 85 


Passover, and let us take of the Fruit of the New Vine, 
even now the Flesh of God from grain and the Blood of 
God from wine truly and unspeakably transformed by the 
Invocation. For He that promised is no deceiver." ! 

The witness of his relative Peter Mansour is to the same 
effect. “How then has it come to pass? .... The 
priest says, like as the angel, That the Holy Spirit de- 
scending may hallow and make this bread Christ’s holy 
Body and this cup Christ’s precious Blood." 3 

“The Holy Spirit descends, as the angel said to the 
Virgin asking, ‘ How shall this be to me, since Iknow not a 
man,’ “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee. So also at 
the table the Holy Spirit descends and it becomes the 
Body of Christ." ? 

The (Iconoclastic) Council of Constantinople (754 A.D ) 
gives us the following statement regarding the mode of 
consecration of the Eucharist. “ As then the natural Body 
of Christ is holy, as being deified, so is it plain that that 
which is by institution His Body, that is, His holy image, 
is holy, as being deified by the grace of a certain sanctifica- 
tion. For this also the Lord Christ, as we said, brought 
about, that as He deified the flesh which He took, by a 
sanctification proper to it according to its nature, from 
its very union with Him, so also He was pleased that the 
bread of the Eucharist, as being no untrue image of His 
natural flesh, being sanctified by the descent of the Holy 
Spirit, should become a Divine Body, the priest who makes 
the offering acting as mediator in the transfer from what is 
common to what is holy." 4 

The second Council of Nieza (787 A.D.), in whose acts 
the above extract from the Council of Constantinople of 
754 is recorded, makes no complaint against the force of 
the Invocation therein indicated, and gives us further proof 
of the universal belief and practice in the matter of Eu- 


! See Appendix, p. 285. 3 Ibid., p. 285. 
? Ibid., p. 285. * [bid., pp. 285-286. 


86 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


charistic consecration. For as we shall see, in objecting 
to the use of “image” and “antitype’ of the consecrated 
elements, the appeal is made against this use of the words 
to the Liturgy of S. Basil, wherein the elements are styled 
“ antitypes” in the Oblation, before the consecration by the 
Invocation immediately following. While the statement 
made in the Council of 787 is entirely too sweeping, its evi- 
dence, in the matter of how the Greeks understood their 
own rite in the eighth century, is incontestable. Epipha- 
nius the Deacon voicing the sentiment of the Council says: 
“Tt has not been clearly enough pointed out that neither 
the Lord, nor the Apostles or fathers, ever said that the 
unbloody sacrifice offered by the priest was an ‘image,’ 
but the very Body and Blood. Indeed before the accom- 
plishing of the hallowing, it seemed good to some of the 
holy fathers that they be called “antitypes. Of whom 

. is Basil . . . who... as all those engaged in the 
priestly mysteries know, in the prayer of the holy Ana- 
phora thus speaks: ‘Making bold we draw nigh to Thy 
holy altar, and placing before Thee the antitypes of the 
Body and Blood of Thy Christ, we beg Thee, and we be- 
seech Thee.’ And the rest that follows makes clearer the 
meaning of the father, that before the hallowing they are 
called ‘ antitypes,' but after the hallowing they are rightly 
spoken of as Christ's Body and Blood, and are, and are be- 
lieved to be.” ! 

The text of the Liturgies of S. Chrysostom and of S. 
Basil as given by Mr. Brightman from ninth century manu- 
scripts will be found in the Appendix? quoted entire so far as 
their Anaphor:z are parallel to our Prayer of Consecration. 

Nicephorus of Constantinople (f 828 a.p.) testifies as 
follows, “ Thus indeed also these [elements] are super- 
naturally changed into the Body and Blood of Christ by 
the Invocation of the priest and by the descent of the Holy 
Spirit: for this power also the priest's prayer possesses." ? 


! See Appendix, p. 286. ? [bid., pp. 287-290. 
3 Antirr., II., adv. Const. Copron. See Appendix, p. 286. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 87 


And again he says, “ What things then also we now offer 
by way of symbol, the bread I mean and the wine, we be- 
lieve most unswervingly and confess, that by the priestly 
Invocation, and by the descent of the All-holy Spirit, 
they are sacramentally, and invisibly, and truly conse- 
crated to be Christ's Body and Blood." ! 

The Caroline Books presented to the Couneil of Frank- 
fort, 794 A.D., give us interesting testimony to the fact that 
the Roman Canon Missae was at that time understood to 
have the same rationale as the Eastern Liturgies. Their wit- 
ness will be given? in the next chapter, which treats more 
particularly of the Mozarabic, Gallican, and Roman rites. 

From Armenia we have a witness of the tenth century 
explaining the Liturgy as they understood it at that time, 
Chosroes the Great (f ο. 972 A.p.). Commenting on the 
Narrative of Institution, he says: “ And here he says: 
‘He took bread and blessed it.’ And ‘to bless’ is to bring 
in the Holy Spirit." * Commenting on the Invocation 
(“ We adore and beseech and ask Thee, O Lord, send upon 
us and upon these offered gifts, Thy coeternal and consub- 
stantial Holy Spirit, that He may bless this bread and 
make it truly the Body of our Lord and Redeemer Jesus 
Christ; and that He may bless this cup and make it truly 
the Blood of our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ, that it 
may be to those who draw nigh for release from con- 
demnation, for expiation, for remission of sins"), he 
says: “For the Redeemer was incarnate of the Virgin 
Mary, the Holy Spirit sent by the Father took flesh in 
Mary's womb and mingled and united it with the Divine 
Word, Who born of her was manifested as her son and at 
the same time as God. The same thing the Holy Spirit 
does in the church and on the holy altar. He unites the 
bread taken, with the Son of God, and likewise the chalice, 


! Antirr. contra Eus. See Appendix, p. 287. 
? See below, pp. 132-133. 3 See Appendix, p. 291. 
* Cf. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Vol. I., p. 439. 


88 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


and they become truly Christ's Body and Blood. This 
same thing we see and believe to be done, because Christ's 
word is unerring, Who commanded what He Himself first 
did, to be doneeven until His coming again in remembrance 
of Him. . .. The Holy Spirit . . . Who also does such - 
a wonderful miracle, changing mere bread and wine into 
the incorruptibility of the Body and Blood of God." ! 

In the modern Armenian Liturgy, the conclusion of the 
Invoeation is repeated nine times, so as to make its mean- 
ing unmistakable.” This is probably the result of the 
attack made upon this part of the Liturgy by the Roman 
Scholastie theologians of the fourteenth century.“ 

Samonas of Gaza (fl. e. 1056 A.p.) tells us that, “ The 
priest places upon the holy table the bread and likewise 
the wine; and as he prays in the holy Invocation, the 
Holy Spirit comes down and rests upon the offered gifts, 
and by the fire of His Godhead, changes the bread and 
wine into Christ's Body and Blood. . . . The priest then 
begs of God the Father, seeing that he stands as an am- 
bassador between God and men, that there may be no hin- 
drance to the descent of the All-holy Spirit, but that He 
will send down again, also, the omnipresent, Divine, per- 
fecting and consecrating Spirit, through whom all things 
that are called holy in heaven and on earth are hallowed 
by partaking of His sanctifying grace, to make the offered 
bread and cup completely a sacrifice, and to make these 
the very Body and Blood of the Lord Christ." * 

Theophylact (f 1107 a.p.) in the course of his comment 
on S. John vi. 48-52, says: “ For He said not, ‘The bread 
which I will give is an antitype of My Flesh;’ but, ‘It is 
My Flesh. For this bread is transformed by ineffable 
words through the sacramental blessing and the descent 
of the Holy Spirit, into the Flesh of the Lord." ? 

! See Appendix, pp. 291-292. 3 See below, p. 96, and note 1. 


? See above, p. 87, note 4. * See Appendix, pp. 292-293. 
5 Ibid., p. 293. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 50) 


Dionysius bar Salibi (T 1171 a.p.), commenting on the 
Syriae Liturgy of S. James, says of the Narrative of 
Institution: “ Afterwards he utters those words which our 
Lord spoke in the upper room when He made the sacra- 
ment: that by these he may show that He is even now the 
same, Who consecrates these things placed upon the altar 
in accord with the Father's will and by the operation of the 
Spirit through the priest who makes the signs of the cross 
and utters the words. For it is not he who ministers, but 
He Who is invoked over the sacraments, who accomplishes 
the consecration.” ! 

Of the Invocation he treats as follows: “The priest 
bowing down says the Invocation of the Holy Spirit. 
Have mercy upon me O God our Father, etc? At this point 
we must inquire concerning the Invocation of the Holy 
Spirit, why here the Holy Spirit descends upon the bread 
and wine. . . . That coming down, He may make the 
bread, etc., that is, that that Holy Spirit comes down 
whom I asked the Father to send. The people say, Amen, 
that is, let it be, as thou hast said. Moreover after the 
priest with bowed head has invoked the Holy Spirit, he 
raises himself, saying, T'hat coming down, etc., and then he 
signs the host three times with the cross, and the cup three 
times also; in order to signify that God the Word Himself 
by the good will of the Father descends and comes down 
upon the mysteries, and consecrates them through the 
Holy Spirit: the bread, indeed, to be His Body, and the 
mixture which is in the cup to make His Blood." ? 

The treatise of Germanus of Constantinople (T c. 740 
A.D.) inasmuch as it has been interpolated in the eleventh 
or twelfth century,“ may be quoted now. “He said, “This 
is My Body, this is My Blood And He commanded His 


! See Appendix p. 294. 

2 Cf. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Vol. I., pp. 88-89. 
3 See Appendix, p. 294. 

* See Brightman, op. cit., pp. xeili-xeiv. 


90 THE ΟΟΝΡΕΟΒΑΤΙΟΝ OF THE EUCHARIST 


Apostles and through them His whole Church, to do this: 
for said He, ‘This do ye in remembrance of Me.’ He had 
not commanded to do this, had He not intended to bestow 
the power to enable to do this. And what is the power? 
The Holy Spirit. . . . He consecrates the mysteries 
through the hand and tongue of the priests. 

*... Then next the priest proclaims to God the Father 
the mysteries of Christ's incarnation, His ineffable birth 
of the holy Virgin Theotokos, His going to and fro and 
conversation in the world, His cross, His death, His going 
down into Hades, His freeing of them that were bound, His 
rising from the dead after three days, His taking up into 
the heavens, His seat at the right hand of His God and 
Father, His second impending glorious, coming again, 
whieh is for us. . . . And again he calls upon [God] to 
complete the mystery of His Son, and that the bread and 
wine be begotten, that is, transformed into the Body 
and Blood of Christ our God. . . . Whencealso the Holy 
Spirit by the graciousness of the Father, and by the will of 
the Son, being invisibly present, supplies His Divineenergy, 
and by the hand of the priest, seals and changes and per- 
fects the holy offered gifts into the Body and Blood of our 
Lord Jesus Christ." ! 

Theodore of Andida, who wrote after the treatise of 
Germanus was put in its present form (in either the twelfth 
or thirteenth century) says, “And after the foregoing 
prayer," 1.6. the opening part of the Invocation, ''the 
high priest signs the holy gifts saying, ‘And makethis bread 
the true precious Body of our Lord and God and Saviour 
Jesus Christ, and that which is in this cup, the true precious 
Blood of Thy Christ which was poured out for the life 
of the world, changing them by Thy Holy Spirit:’ which, 
indeed, we know and believe so to be transformed, as the 
Invocation signifies." ? 

Most interesting is the Reply of Manuel, Great Rhetor of 


! See Appendix, pp. 294-295. ? Ibid., p. 295. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 91 


the Great Church of Constantinople, to Friar Francis, 
made about the year 1240. It probably marks the first 
eonfliet of the unchanged tradition of the East with the 
novel teaching that, but recently devised, was flaunted in 
the face of the Greeks by their Western conquerors. For 
the Fourth Crusade had been diverted from its purpose, 
and Constantinople had been plundered in 1204, and a 
Latin Empire set up. 

“Again, concerning the divine and mystical symbols, 
that is, of the divine Body of the Lord, you say, that the 
words of the Lord, ‘Take eat, and drink,’ by themselves 
change and perfect the elements, and that the divine 
prayers and holy invocations of the saints have nothing 
to do with it. But we say that those same divine words 
of the Lord have a reference to consecration, although the 
power of the priesthood is through the divine prayers and 
invocations be it of Saint Chrysostom or the Great Basil. 
For the divine grace of the priesthood was given to the 
Apostles by Christ on this account, and from them in suc- 
cession, and our priests [have received] to consecrate the 
divine gifts through the Invocation and overshadowing 
of the Holy Spirit. Thus think we about these things, 
and we speak according to the orthodox tradition handed 
down through the fathers from the Apostles." ! 

Nicholas Cabasilas of Thessalonica ( 1371 A.p.) treats of 
this subject at some length in Chaps. XXVII.-X X X. of his 
Explanation of the Divine Liturgy. He first expounds the 
sense of the liturgy and then repels the (then) recent at- 
tacks of the Latins. As these chapters are given in full 
in the Appendix,? only brief citations will be made here. 
Treating of the Anaphora he says: “And so the most 
honourable and holy things having been arranged, what re- 
mains than to turn to the thanksgiving of God the Author 
of all good things? In other words, imitating the Chief 
Priest who gave thanks to His God and Father before He 


! See Appendix, p. 296. ? Q.v., pp. 296-305. 


92 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


distributed the sacrament of the communion, he [the priest] 
also before the perfecting prayer by which he consecrates 
the holy gifts, makes this thanksgiving to the God and 
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ: “Let us give thanks to 
the Lord:" and all assenting and replying, “It is meet and 
right,’ he offers by himself the thanksgiving to God; both 
glorifying Him and with angels hymning Him and confess- 
ing the largesses of all the good things that come eternally 
to us from Him. And finally having made mention of 
the Saviour's dispensation for us, ineffable and passing 
thought, then he consecrates the precious gifts and the 
whole sacrifice is completed. And after what manner? 
Having described that dread supper and how before His 
passion He gave it to His holy disciples, and how He re- 
ceived the cup, and how He took bread and hallowed the 
Eucharist, and how He spoke the words whereby He de- 
clared the mystery, and having repeated those same words, 
then he falls to and prays and supplicates, applying those 
divine words of the only-begotten Son our Saviour even 
with reference to the offered gifts, and they having received 
His all-holy and all-powerful Spirit are changed, the bread 
into His same precious and holy Body, and the wine into 
His same undefiled and holy Blood. 

- “And these things having been said, the whole of the 
holy action is finished and perfected and the gifts hal- 
lowed." ! 

In Chap. XXIX. he discusses the objections that were 
being made in his time by the Roman Scholastic theo- 
logians to the Eastern liturgical praxis, e.g. that the East- 
ern view attacks the power of Christ's word, that it 
betokens self-confidence, and that it makes the mystery 
depend upon a human prayer. Of course also the Latins 
alleged S. Chrysostom's homily On the Treason oj Judas. 
In reply Cabasilas says: “It is not hard to resolve these 
objections. And first we must begin with those words 


! Ch. xxvii. See Appendix, pp. 296-297. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 93 


of the divine John upon which they rely. For if this 
word is also powerful after the manner of the creative 
word, let us see it. God said, ‘Increase and multiply:’ 
what then? After that word do we make no prayer to 
that end? Have we no need of anything else for the in- 
crease? Or, is there need also of marriage and sexual 
intercourse, and care besides, and without these the race 
cannot subsist and increase? Therefore even as in that 
matter for the procreation of children we consider mar- 
riage necessary, and after marriage we pray for this same 
thing, and we think we do not dishonour the creative 
word, knowing it is the cause of growth of the race, but 
that the mode is through marriage, through nurture and 
through other things; so also in this matter we believe 
that it is the Lord’s word which works the mystery, but 
thus, through the priest, and through his intercession 
and prayer."! Then after showing at some length how 
Goďs grace is given to us through the means of prayer, 
and that to pray for anything is not an act of self-confi- 
dence but of trust in God; he says: “ Therefore we believe 
the consecration of the mysteries to be by the prayer of the 
priest, not that we trust in anything human, but in the 
power of God. For it is not on account of the man that 
prays but on account of God that hears; not because that 
one asked, but because the Truth has promised to give." ? 
Toward the close of this chapter, after having added other 
illustrations of the principle he wished to set forth, he 
says: “But that the word of the Lord concerning the 
mysteries, read in the form of a narrative, suffices for 
the consecration of the gifts, no one of the apostles or the 
teachers appears to say. But that once spoken by the 
Lord, in that it was spoken by Him, as the creative word 
it always has power, even the blessed John says; but 
that as now read by the priest it has this power on account 
of being spoken by him, can nowhere be learned, since the 


" See Appendix, pp. 299-300. 2 Ibid., pp. 300-301. 


94 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


creative word itself does not operate, because in reference 
to each case it is spoken by some man, but because it was 
once for all spoken by the Lord." ! 

In Chap. XXX. he very neatly turns the argument 
against his adversaries by reminding them of the real force 
of the Invocation in the Canon Missae, 1.e. the Supplices te 
after the recital of the Narrative of Institution, point- 
ing out that in fact the consecration of the Eucharist is 
accomplished by the same method in the Latin Church as 
in the Eastern. “But what altogether gives them the 
check is that also the Latin Church, in what they appear 
to offer, after the Lord's word do not refuse to pray on be- 
half of the gifts. Does it escape them, that they pray, 
not at once, after the word, and that, not clearly, they ask 
for consecration and change into the Lord's Body, but they 
employ other words tending toward that and having 
the same foree? What is the prayer; Bid that these gifts 
be carried up by the hand oj the Angel unto T hy supercelestial 
altar. Now let them say, what is this carrying up of 
these gifts? Do they pray some change of place for them, 
from the earth and the lower parts to the heaven, or some 
increment and change from lower to higher uses?"? 
After pointing out the absurdity of this prayer if the ele- 
ments are already consecrated, he goes on: “ Whence they 
evidently know them to be yet bread and wine that have 
not received consecration, and therefore they pray for 
them, as still needing prayer. . . . This same prayer 
has no other force for the gifts than their change into the 
Lord's Body and Blood."? Again farther on, he says, 
“The priest prays that the gifts be carried to this super- 
celestial altar, that is, that they be consecrated, that they 
be changed into Christ's supercelestial Body." * Cabasi- 
las in conclusion says, “ It is evident then, that to despise 
the prayer on behalf of the gifts made after the Lord's 


! See Appendix, p. 303. 3 Ibid., p. 304. 
? [bid., p. 303. * [bid., p. 305. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 95 


words is not a peculiarity of the Latin Church as such, 
but of some few, and they younger men, who disgrace it 
in other respects, having leisure for nothing else, than to 
tell and hear some newer thing." ' These caustic words 
were only too true, as we shall see, yet this novel opinion 
ultimately prevailed in the Western Church, casting out 
the original tradition held from the beginning in the West 
as well as in the East. 

In Chap. XXXI. he answers the question why the 
priest invokes God the Father for the consecration of the 
oblation. “ But why does not the priest call upon the Son 
to hallow the gifts, seeing that He is a Priest and Consecra- 
tor, as has been said, but calls upon the Father? In order 
that you may learn that the Saviour has power to conse- 
crate not as Man, but as God, and because of the Divine 
power which He possesses in common with the Father. 

“ And this the Lord Himself desiring to show, when He 
was perfecting the mystery, looked up to heaven, and pre- 
sented the bread to His Father. Therefore also He appears 
to accomplish some of His wonders thus, in the form of 
prayer to God, in order that He may prove that these 
things are not of His human nature, in accordance with 
which He had a mother upon earth, but of His Godhead, 
in accordance with which He had God as His Father.” 3 

It is interesting to note that at this time the Roman 
Church first faulted the Armenian Liturgy because it did 
not conform to the view of consecration that then pre- 
vailed in the West. Although the Armenian Liturgy 
had been known to the Roman Church since the tenth or 
eleventh century, no attempt had been made to alter it in 
the matter of consecration hitherto, for the very simple 
reason that Scholastie theology had only recently de- 
veloped the notion that the recitation of our Lord’s words 
was the essential and effective means of consecration. In 
true Roman fashion a new notion, once fairly started on 


" See Appendix, p. 305. * Ibid., p. 306. 


90 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


its course, became a standard whereby to criticise all else. 
To hold that the Eucharist was not consecrated until the 
Invocation had been said, as the Armenian Church had 
always done from the beginning, was not condemned 
by the Roman Church until the year 1341}: On differ- 
ent occasions when some project of union between the 
Armenian and the Roman churches was advanced, the 
errors (!) of the Armenians were discussed (in the years 
1080, 1145, 1205, 1307, 1318, 1330, for example), but no 
complaint was made against the Liturgy (although it had 
come under censure in other respects) in the question of 
the force of the Invocation till 1341. At the time when 
Cabasilas was turning the tables on the Latin crities of the 
Greek rite, the Latins were engaged in trying to enforce 
their novel opinion, as a prerequisite to intercommunion, 
upon the Armenians for the first time. 

It is obvious that the attacks made by the Roman 
Church upon the unbroken liturgical tradition of the Greek 
and other Eastern Churches served but to strengthen their 
loyalty to their inheritance, and bring out further writings 
in its defence. Thus Symeon of Thessalonica (f 1429 
A.D.), in his Explanation concerning the Divine Temple 

. and the Divine M ystagogy, describes the central act 
of the Liturgy as follows: — 

“Then the hierarch hymning the greatest of God's 
works the incarnation of the Only-begotten, and again the 
greatest work of His economy on our behalf His death, 
enters into the anamnesisof the mysteries, and shouts aloud 
those holy words which the Saviour in His holy action 
spoke: ‘Take, eat, this is My Body,’ and, ' Drink ye all of it, 
this is My Blood,’ and so forth. Then having given thanks 


! Cf. Le Brun, Erplication, etc., Vol. III., pp. 216-219, Paris, 
1726. Cf. Le Brun, Défense, etc., pp. 15-18, Paris, 1727. An 
examination of Councils referred to by Le Brun as contained in 
the Annals of Baronius (and Raynaldus) and in the records given 
in Mansi fully bears out the statements made. 


THE ΡΑΤΗΙΡΤΙΟ WITNESS 97 


on behalf of all, and offering the gifts on behalf of all, he 
invokes the Divine grace of the Spirit upon himself and 
upon the offered gifts: through which grace, and having 
perfected these things with the seal of the cross and with 
the Invocation of the Spirit, straightway he sees the living 
Jesus lying before him, the bread and the cup being truly 
He. For the bread is His Body and that which is in the 
cup, His Blood.” " Symeon also devotes a whole section 
of his treatise to a defence of the Invocation against the 
Latin impugners thereof. From this we shall give but 
an extract or two, as the whole will be found in the Ap- 
pendix.” “But here some of those not rightly minded, 
being in doubt about the Invocation of the Spirit and the 
consecration of the gifts, and rather opposing themselves 
to those things delivered by the Saviour and His Apostles, 
and their successors the divine fathers, stir up strife, ask- 
ing, how it is that we are not satisfied with the Lorďs 
words only at the consecration of the divine gifts, but trust 
in our own prayer? These indeed reject rashly and pro- 
fanely the Invocation of the Divine Spirit, and (alas!) 
deny His power and energy, which the Saviour both 
promised to give and granted to His Apostles."? 

“The coming of the bread and wine to be Christ’s 
Body and Blood, we distinctly believe to be begun by the 
prayers of the priest, and to be perfected by the sign of the 
cross and by the Invocation of the Holy Spirit, the Lord's 
words, ‘Take, eat,’ and,“ Drink ye all of it,’ and, ‘This do ye 
in remembrance of Me,’ affording once for all to the Apostles 
and to the successors to their grace, the power to accom- 
plish this through prayers." * — — 

In conclusion he says: “Let the adversaries be con- 
vieted also from their own Liturgy. For they pray also 
that the offered gifts become Christ's Body and Blood, 
and they bless the gifts, and breathe upon them according 


! $86. See Appendix, pp. 306-307. . ? Ibid., p. 307. 
2 See § 88, Ibid., pp.-307-311:- 4 Ibid., pp. 308-309: 


98 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


+ 


to divine tradition, not being satisfied with the Lord’s 
words alone. Let these innovate in all things. But we, 
holding fast the traditions which we have received, as the 
Saviour, through Himself and through His Apostles and 
the fathers delivered, let us consecrate the mysteries of the 
dread communion by the Invocation of the Divine Spirit, 
— through the Lord's utterances, and the priestly prayers,! 
also all the divine acts of consecration, — by prayer of 
the priest in the divine Invocation, and by the sign of the 
cross, let us believe that the consecration is received in 
accord with the divine tradition." 2 

It is abundantly evident to any open-minded reader that 
the Greeks had maintained a very clear notion of the rela- 
tion of the Narrative of Institution, and of the Invocation 
of the Holy Spirit respectively, to the consecration of the 
Eucharist. The words of Christ declaratory of the gift He 
gave at the original Institution, and His command to do 
as He had done, were regarded as a living word of power, 
analogous to God's creative word. "This word is recited 
historically in the Anaphora, and is brought to present 
fulfilment by the instrumentality of the prayer of the 
priest and the operation of the Holy Spirit in answer 
thereto. When, therefore, we meet with the assertion 
that at the Council of Florence in 1439 the Greeks ac- 
ceded entirely to the modern Roman view of Eucharistic 
consecration, we are not inclined to believe such a state- 
ment, and we turn to the records of that assembly to see 
what really took place? For à whole year and more the 
Greeks and Latins were assembled at Florence before the 
Latins raised the question of the “ form" of consecration 


! Sc. “let us perform." ? See Appendix, p. 311. 

3 Cf. Le Brun, Défense, ete., pp. 19-57; Explication, ete., Vol. 
IIL, pp. 221-222; Crakanthorp, Defensio Eccl. Angl., pp. 495- 
499; Cosin, History of Transubstantiation, Works, A.C.L., Vol. 
IV., p. 135 (228); Brett, Dissertation appended to his Collection 
of the Principal Liturgies, pp. 236-247 (London, 1838). 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 99 


of the Eucharist. Then on June 8, 1439, the eve of the 
death of the Greek patriarch, the Latins began to find 
fault with the Invocation, and with its wording, in the 
Liturgy of the Greeks, and later even demanded the altera- 
tion or removal of it. The Greeks resisted these demands, 
and the Decree of Union contains the following words only 
in reference to the Eucharist : — 

“Moreover in either unleavened or in leavened wheaten 
bread the Body of Christ is truly consecrated, and the 
priests are bound to consecrate the Body of the Lord in 
either, each indeed according to the use of his own Church, 
be it Western or Eastern." 1 

Inasmuch as the Latins renewed their attacks? upon 
the Greeks immediately after the subscription of this De- 
cree, we should note a few of the utterances made by some 
of the Greeks in the course of the disputes concerning the 
consecration of the Eucharist. The first of these was on 
the Sth of June, and as it is sometimes misrepresented 
will be given in full: — 

“Concerning the Divine Consecration the inquiry was 
made upon the part of the Latins, How is it that, after 
Christ’s words have been spoken, Take eat, for this is My 
Body which is broken for you for remission of sins, and 
Drink ye all of it, for this is My Blood of the New and 
Eternal Testament, which is shed for you and for many for 
the remission of sins; and the holy gifts have been hal- 
lowed through these words, how is it that after these you 
make a prayer and say, And make this bread the precious 
Body of Thy Christ, and that which is in the cup, the precious 
Blood of Thy Christ, changing them by Thy Holy Spirit. 
And this was answered thus. We said that we acknow- 
ledge, that through these words the divine bread is hallowed 
and becomes Christ’s Body ; but afterward just as you also 
say, Command that these gijts be carried up by the hand of 
the Holy Angel to Thy heavenly altar, so also we pray to the 

! See Appendix, p. 312. 2 Ibid., p. 313. 


100 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


effect that The Holy Spirit come down upon us, and make 
in our midst ! this bread the precious Body of T hy Christ, and 
that which is in the cup, the precious Blood of Thy Christ, 
and To change them by His Holy Spirit, so that they may 
be unto those partaking jor purification of heart, for remis- 
sion of sins: that they be not for our judgment or for con- 
demnation." ? 

It is manifest that the Greek prelates who made this an- 
swer had in mind the argument whereby Cabasilas, about 
a century before, had turned the tables against the Latins 
out of the prayer Supplices te of the Canon Missae? The 
Greeks regarded the words of Christ with all due reverence, 
as the ground and warrant for the consecration and as 
ultimately the cause and source thereof. But after re- 
citing them, the prayer of the Invocation was made in order 
to bring true, here and now, the declaration of Christ to 
His Apostles. This explanation is appropriate also to a 
similar utterance of three of the same prelates on the 
10th of June. 

“With regard to the question of the mysteries, we ac- 
knowledge that they are hallowed through the Lord's 
words, even if afterward we make invocation; 'Let it be- 
come Christ's Body and Blood." 4 

It is obvious that the Greeks would not have resisted the 
attempt to put into the Decree of Union any words that 
might imply agreement with the Latins upon this point, 
if they had had any idea of accepting on behalf of the 


! This is the only reasonable understanding of the words ἐν ἡμῖν. 
To translate “in vs" would be to ascribe to the Greeks a receptionist 
view of the Eucharistie Presence, and thus to make nonsense of the 
whole passage. The Greeks considered our Lord's words as the 
source of the consecration,-but deemed the Invocation necessary 
to the present accomplishment thereof at each celebration of the 
Eucharist. >| 

? See Appendix, pp. 311-312. 

? See above, pp. 94-95; and Appendix, pp. 303-305. 

1 See Appendix, p. 312. : 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 101 


Jastern Church the Roman notion of consecration by 
the mere repetition of Christ's words. Nor again would 
the dispute have been continued after the Decree was 
signed if the Eastern bishops had given in to the unhistor- 
ical subtleties of Scholastie theology in this particular. In 
fact the Greeks could not see why there should be any 
dispute about the matter, thinking that the prayer 
Supplices te in the Canon Missae was, and was intended to 
be, the equivalent of the Epiklesis of their own rites. 
The opinion of the Greeks as to the relation of the words 
of Christ, and of the Invocation, to the consecration of the 
Eucharist comes out. clearly 3n the speech of Isidore of 
Kieff, made on June 20, in answer to the sophistries of 
Turrecremata. 

“This missal which we use has been handed down from 
Basil and Blessed Chrysostom; we used it moreover before 
the time of the schism, nor has any alteration been made. 
Nevertheless the Western Church never said one word 
about this matter; since forsooth we were agreed and 
striving for the same end, accordingly we say the same 
thing. And I say: that we believe that that which ac- 
complishes the mystery is the utterance of the Lord, and 
we believe that the Lord's word is a cause of the divine 
gifts. And that word is always repeated by the priest, 
and the priest undertakes that that word having been 
repeated may be applied and may be the same word with 
the Lord's [own] word. And in order that it may be 
so applied, the Holy Spirit is invoked and the priest sup- 
plieates that through the power of the Holy Spirit the 
boon may be granted, that the word repeated may be 
rendered as effective as was the word of God. And thus 
we believe it is made effectual through that prayer of the 
priest. And I approve, that the Lord's words have a 
function as seeds, because without a seed fruit cannot be 
brought forth. So with regard to this word of the Lord. 
Nevertheless wheresoever the seed falls, it requires other 


102 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


helps, as a priest, an altar, and prayers. Wherefore we 
believe that on this point we are agreed with you." ! 

A most interesting light is thrown upon the guestion 
before us, in the narrative written by Sylvester Syropulus,? 
who was present not only at the public debates of the 
Council but also at the semi-private conferences of some 
of the Greek prelates with the Pope. His words give us a 
picture of things from the Greek point of view, and show 
us what was really in the minds of those who defended the 
Eastern Liturgy and its Epiklesis. Thus he tells us: — 

“Then they [the Latins] sought to correct us and to 
make void the third blessing at the consecration of the 
unbloody sacrifice, and the Invocation made by the priest. 
For they were wont to say that the Lord’s words hallow 
these [sacrifices], that is to say, Take, eat, this is My Body, 
and Drink ye all of this. Wherefore also the Latins were 
faulting us, on the ground of our doing mistakenly, in 
that after the pronunciation of these words of the Lord 
we pray over, and bless, the holy gifts. And they were 
seeking to prevent our priests from praying over them, and 
from blessing them, after saying these words of the Lord." ? 

Syropulus also tells of the resistance of the Greeks to 
this demand to alter their Liturgies, and how the Latins 
kept at them, striving by every means to establish the 
Latin opinion on this matter, and “ to compel our priests 
to consecrate in accordance therewith."* And he notes 
on one occasion the reply of the Metropolitan of Russia 
(Isidore of Kieff) and the Archbishop of Nicza (Bessa- 
rion), who opposed the Latins in part, and in part agreed 
with them. 


‘See Appendix, pp. 313-314. Note what follows the quo- 
tation. Principaliter surely is equivalent to ὡς ἀρχή. 

? Great Ecclesiarch and Dikaiophylax of the Constantinopolitan 
Church. He wrote his History (or Memoirs) c. 1444-1445 A.D. 

3 Section X., Chap. I.; see Appendix, pp. 314-315. 

* [bid.; see Appendix, p. 315. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 103 


“For they said (with other things) also this, that, ‘Even 
as the Divine command once for all spoken by God, namely, . 
Let the earth bring forth the herb of grass, producing seed 
after its kind, from the beginning even until now operates, 
and will operate until the end of the world; and we are 
persuaded that as it is the Divine command which em- 
powers the earth to bud and bring forth fruit, but there 
is need nevertheless of the work of the husbandman, for 
we see this mightily coöperating with the earth for the 
production of fruit: so also at this holy sacrifice we say, 
that those are the words which hallow this, but there are 
added to that also the prayers and the invocations of the 
priest in order to the consecration, just as the care of 
the husbandman contributes to the productiveness of 
the earth.” When they had said these things, neither 
were all our representatives pleased, having their gaze 
fixed upon the purport of the things written in the 
Divine Liturgies; nor were the Latins much more 
pleased, having regard to their own prejudice. And 
therefore they did not agree.” ! 

Syropulus also tells us that the speech made by Bes- 
sarion (who afterward went over entirely to the Latin 
Church and was rewarded by being made a Cardinal), 
after the subseription of the Decree of Union on July 5, 
was an expression of his own mind alone? and did not 
represent the Greek Church nor commit the other Greeks 
in the slightest degree. Even so, it is evident that Bes- 
sarion did not go as far in his statements as he is repre- 
sented as doing, in the account prepared and redacted under 
the direction of Cardinal Julian Cesarini.? 

The Greeks did not hesitate to avow their belief that the 
words of Christ as “ once for all spoken” are the “ source” 
whence the Church derives Her authority and power to 

! Seetion X., Chapter I.; see Appendix, pp. 315-316. 


2 Section X., Chap. VIII.; see Appendix, p. 316. 
8 Cf. Le Brun, Défense, etc., pp. 32-39. 


104 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


consecrate the Eucharist. This conviction the Latins 
wished to interpret as an admission of their contention, 
but a very little thought is sufficient to make clear, how 
far removed is the Greek view of the function of the Nar- 
rative of Institution in the Liturgy, from that of Latin 
Scholasticism. The prayer of the priest, at each cele- 
bration of the Eucharist, is requisite to the fulfilment of 
the consecration then and there. Nor have the Eastern 
Churches ever swerved from their belief in this respect, as 
we shall see. And πο one who has really looked into the 
facts of the case can assert, with any semblance of honesty, 
that the Greeks gave their assent to the Scholastic Roman 
teaching upon the “ form" of Eucharistie consecration, at 
the Council of Florence. 

„Mark of Ephesus (f 1451 a.p.), who was the most 
stanch defender of the Greek Church at the Council of 
Florence, has left us a treatise wherein he speaks with the 
same clearness and pertinency as he did at the Council it- 
self. It is entitled, That the divine gifts are not conse- 
secrated by the utterance of the Lord's words only, but by the 
subsequent prayer and blessing of the priest in the power of 
the Holy Spirit.‘ The position maintained by Mark is 
this: “ We, having received from the holy Apostles and the 
teachers of the Church that succeeded them, the rationale 
of the mystical liturgy, find in none of these that the gift 
of the Eucharist is consecrated and perfected by the Lord’s 
words alone, and changed to the Lord’s very Body and 
Blood: but that these words being spoken in the form of a 
narrative by way of preface, we, in agreement with all, 
utter them with reference to the memorial of what was 
then done and as supplying the power to the offered gifts 
for the change: and that the subsequent prayer and the 
blessing of the priest by their energy change the gifts to 
the very Body and Blood of the Lord."? After having 
quoted those parts of the Liturgy of the Apostolie Con- 


! See Appendix, pp. 317-321. 3 ρα. potr. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 105 


stitutions, and of the Liturgies of S. James, S. Basil, and 
S. Chrysostom, which correspond to our Prayer of Conse- 
cration, he proceeds, “ Thus all these harmoniously say 
the Lord’s words by way of preface, and by their means 
bring us to aremembrance of what was then done, and as 
supplying the authority for the consecration of the offered 
gifts: finally, they pray for and invoke the grace of the 
Holy Spirit, that it coming may apply the things then 
spoken to these gifts now and consecrate the offered gifts, 
and change them to the Lord's Body and Blood." ! Ina 
more condensed form Mark reproduces the arguments of 
Cabasilas, emphasizing the difference between the words of 
Christ as originally spoken by Him in the institution of the 
Eucharist, and as repeated in the form of a narrative by 
the Church in her act of liturgical te to Christ’s 
command, “ Do this." 

Gabriel of Philadelphia (1541-1616 4.p.) in his apology 
for the Eastern Church, speaks of the oblation * becoming 
the Body and Blood of Christ through the invocation of the 
Holy Spirit,“ “through the blessing and prayer of the 
priest";? and “through the blessing. and the power of 
the prayers." * 

The tenacity with which the Greek Church has always 
clung to the primitive tradition in the matter of the con- 
secration of the Eucharist, comes into strong relief again 
in the seventeenth century. In spite of the tremendous 
pressure brought to bear upon that much oppressed part 
of the Catholie Church by the Roman Church, a pressure 
that accomplished the adoption of Roman phraseology 
regarding the doctrine of the Eucharist, we nevertheless 
find the same steadfast adherence to the ancient teaching 
and practice regarding consecration, as two centuries be- 
fore at Florence. The Orthodox Confession (1643 A.D.), 
Question 100, asks, “What things are requisite to a 

1 See Appendix, p. 317. 5. 7014: 51 ΘΙ. 
2 Ibid., p. 323. 4 Ibid., p. 324. 


106 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Mystery?”, and gives this “Answer. Three things. 
Proper matter, as is the water in Baptism: the bread and 
wine in the Eucharist: the oil, and the other things ac- 
cording to the Mystery. Second, the priest or bishop who 
is regularly ordained. Third, the Invocation of the Holy 
Spirit, and the form of words, with which the priest con- 
secrates the Mystery by the power of the Holy Spirit, with 
a declared intention of consecrating It."' In Question 
107 we are asked, “ What is to be observed in this Mystery 
[of the Eucharist]?" “Answer. . . . Fourth, it is requi- 
site, that the priest have this intention at the time when 
he consecrates the gifts, that the substance of the bread 
and the substance of the wine is changed into the sub- 
stance of the true Body and Blood of Christ through the 
operation of the Holy Spirit, the Invocation of whom he 
makes at that moment, completing this Mystery, praying 
and saying: ‘Send down thy Holy Spirit upon us and upon 
these offered gifts, and make this bread the precious Body 
of thy Christ, and that which is in the cup the precious 
Blood of thy Christ, changing them by thy Holy Spirit.’ 
After these words the change straightway takes place, and 
the bread becomes the true Body of Christ, and the wine 
His true Blood." 3 

Α witness so unequivocal needs no comment. 

Again in the Fifteenth Decree of the Synod of Jerusalem 
(1672 a.p.) we read: ''We reject as alien to Christian doc- 
trine, [the notion] that the integrity of the Mystery re- 
quires the use of the earthly thing; for this is contrary 
to the Mystery of the Oblation, which having been in- 
stituted by the Substantial Word, and having been hal- 
lowed by the Invocation of the Holy Spirit, is perfected 
by the presence of the thing signified, namely, the Body 
and Blood of Christ." ? 

About the year 1671 the following Declaration was made 


! See Appendix, pp. 321-322. 3 Ibid., p. 322. 
? Ibid., p. 322. 


THE ΡΑΤΗΙΡΤΙΟ WITNESS 107 


by some Greeks to the Marquis de Nointel, the French 
Ambassador at Constantinople, in answer to his request 
for a statement of belief: “ Concerning the dread Mystery 
of the Eucharist, we believe and confess unswervingly, 
that the living Body of our Lord Jesus Christ is present 
invisibly by actual presence in the Mystery: for when, 
after uttering the Lord’s words, the celebrating priest says: 
‘Make this bread the precious Body of thy Christ, and that 
which is in the cup the precious Blood of thy Christ, 
changing them by the Holy Spirit,’ then by the operation 
of the All-holy Spirit, supernaturally and ineffably the 
bread is changed actually and truly and really intothat very 
Body of the Saviour, and the wine into His living Blood." ! 

About this same time, in the second half of the seven- 
teenth century, Silvester Medvedeff made an attempt to 
introduce Roman teaching on this point into the Russian 
Church. He was thoroughly refuted by Sophronius 
and Joannicius Lichoudi, and the Russian Church remained 
firm in adhering to the Eastern and primitive tradition.? 
Whether or not this controversy brought it about is not 
easy to determine, but the custom prevails in the Russian 
Church to-day of a prostration after the Invocation,? a 
custom not as yet adopted throughout the Greek Church. 
Bells are also rung at this moment. Therefore the Oath 
of a Russian Bishop at his consecration may, most fittingly, 
be quoted here. “Moreover I believe and hold, that in 
the Divine Liturgy the consecration of the Body and Blood 
of Christ is accomplished, as the Eastern and our ancient 
Russian Doctors teach, by the overshadowing and opera- 
tion of the Holy Ghost through the episcopal or priestly 
Invocation, in the words of prayer to God the Father, 
“Make this bread the precious Body of Thy Christ, ’” etc. 4 

! See Appendix, p. 323. 

? See Mouravieff, A History of the Church of Russia (English 
translation), Oxford, 1842, p. 252. 

3 Cf. Maltzew, Die göttlichen Liturgieen, Berlin, 1890, p. 229. 

* See Appendix, p. 323. 


108 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Eustratius Argentes (f c. 1755-1760 a.p.), a learned 
Greek physician, in his book Against Azymes, discusses 
the subject of the consecration of the Eucharist at length. 
In fact he devotes the second part of his work to it alone. 
As reference has already been made to this treatise in the 
last chapter, we shall here quote only the two main pro- 
positions which the writer advances and defends. 

“Since the consecration of the Lord's Supper, which is 
made by the priests ought to be founded upon the praxis 
of our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, who, after the ministra- 
tion of that most holy symposium, gave command saying, 
‘Do this:" therefore we intend and purpose in this first 
postulate to establish and elucidate in what manner our 
Lord Himself consecrated the bread and the cup of the . 
Eucharist. And from this we may learn, what is easy to 
comprehend, even the method according to which the 
priests ought to consecrate: since the consecration on the 
part of the priests 15 logically patterned after Christ's act 
of consecration. 


“ PosTULATE I 


“Our Lord Jesus Christ through thanksgiving, and bless- 
ing, and invocation, consecrated and changed the bread and 
wine into His own Body and Blood, but not through those 
words, ‘This is My Body.’ For He spoke these words in 
order to make clear to the Apostles what that was which 
He had already blessed." ? 

He ends this postulate as follows: “ We conclude there- 
fore that our Lord Jesus Christ through His almighty 
blessing as God, consecrated and changed the bread and 
wine into His own Body and Blood: but that being also 
perfect Man, He joined to His divine blessing thanksgiving 

"ΣΥΝΤΑΓΜΑ KATA ΑΖΥΜΩΝ, ΕἸΣ ΤΡΙΑ ΔΙΑΙΡΕΘΕΝ ΤΜΗΜΑΤΑ, 
"Qv. ... Τὸ δὲ δεύτερον, ΠΕΡΙ ATIAZMOT TOT MYZTHPIOY. Zuvredev 
παρὰ τοῦ φιλοσοφωτάτου. καὶ ἐν ἰατροῖς ἀρίστου MAKAPITOY ΕΥΣΤΡΑ- 
TIOY Τοὐπίκλην APTENTH TOY XIOY. ... EN NATIIAIQ. ... 1845. 

? See Appendix, p. 324. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 109 


and prayers and invocations to his Heavenly Father. . . . 
Then He proffered these things to His Apostles to eat and 
drink, explaining to them also what it was He gave them, 
namely His Body and His Blood. 

“Therefore those words are explanatory only of the 
Mystery, but not also consecratory, for the change takes 
‚place through the blessing and the thanksgiving and the 
invocation. Q.E.D." ὦ 

His second postulate is as follows: “ The priests of the 
Christians ought to consecrate the bread and wine of the 
Lord's Supper through thanksgiving and blessing and 
invocation, not through the words, ‘This is My Body’: 
and they ought to utter these words not with reference 
to consecrating, but to show that they purpose to perform 
what Christ did: and besides they ought to explain to 
those partaking what is being given them, even as Christ 
also explained the same to His Apostles. 

“ Since it has been proved most clearly and exactly, that 
our Lord Jesus through blessing and thanksgiving and 
invocation of His heavenly Father consecrated the bread 
and cup of the Lord's Supper, and changed them into His 
own Body and Blood, and then explained and made clear 
to His disciples, what it was that had been blessed and was 
being given to them: and finally laid the command upon 
them to do the same that He had done, saying, ' Do this’: 
it becomes evident that the priests of the Christians ought 
to imitate Him, and to do without deviation what He 
did." ? 

He concludes this postulate thus, ‘‘We conclude then that 
the priests of the Christians ought to consecrate the bread 
and wine of the Lord’s Supper not through those words, 
‘This is My Body’: but through prayer, and thanksgiving, 
and blessing, and invocation of the Divine Name. a.E.p." ὁ 

It remains for us to note but two or three more witnesses 


! See Appendix, pp. 324-325. 2 Ibid., pp. 326-327. 
3 Ibid., p. 330. 


110 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


to the maintenance of the primitive tradition unbroken 
from the beginning until to-day by the Eastern Church. 

In a Handbook treating of the Seven Mysteries of the Holy 

Eastern Church, published at Athens in 1832, we 
read: “In many ways the Latins break the law in the 
matter of this most divine Mystery, but especially in these 
three. . . . Second. That also they think that the con- 
secration of the offered gifts is not brought about through 
the Invocation of the Holy Spirit, but through the Lord’s 
words, ‘Take, eat,’ etc., which are spoken by the priest in 
the form of a narrative." ! 

In the Longer Catechism of the Russian Church, pro- 
mulgated by the Holy Synod in 1839,? we read: 

“Q. What is the name for that part of the Liturgy, in 
which the Sacrament itself is celebrated and consecrated ? 

“A. The Liturgy of the faithful; because the faithful 
only, that is, the baptized, have a right to be present at 
this Service. 

“Q. What is the most essential act in this part of the 
Liturgy ? 

“A. The utterance of the words which Jesus Christ spake 
in instituting the Sacrament; Take, eat, this is My Body; 
Drink ye all of it, for this is My Blood of the New Testa- 
ment; Matt. xxvi. 26, 27, 28; And after this the invocation 
of the Holy Ghost, and the blessing the gifts, that is, the 
bread and wine? which have been offered. 

“0. Why is this“ so essential ? 

! See Appendix, p. 330. Cf. Argentes’ dicta in regard to the 
significance of ‘‘bless” and '' blessing" (Part II., Post. 1, Sup. II., 
Chap. 3, and Chap. 6. See Appendix, pp. 325-326. 

? See The Teaching of the Russian Church, by the Rev. A. C. 
Headlam, London, 1897, pp. 6-7. 

SN.B. The elements are regarded as mere bread and wine 
after the Narrative, and after the Oblation. 

* I.e. the Invocation and blessing of the gifts. Cf. The Ortho- 
dox Confession, question 107, quoted above, p. 106. Cf. also the 
Greek Catechism of Nicholas Persides, Athens, 1903, quoted on 
p. 334 in the Appendix. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 111 


“ A. Because at the moment of this act, the bread and 
wine! are changed, or transubstantiated, into the very 
Body of Christ, and into the very Blood of Christ." 

In the present Euchologion of the Greek Church we find 
the following foot-note with reference to the deacon's 
pointing to the elements during the recitation of the Nar- 
rative of Institution by the priest: “It is to be noted, that, 
the demonstrative pronominal sentence, ‘This is My Body,’ 
and again, ‘This is My Blood,’ is not uttered with reference 
to the offered gifts, but with reference to those which Jesus 
then took in His own hands, and blessed and gave to His 
disciples: and here those words of the Lord are repeated 
in narrative form, and conseguently this pointing is 
superfluous and rather opposed to the right opinion of the 
Eastern Church of Christ." 2 

How the Greeks understand their own Liturgy to-day 
may be readily seen from a commentary on the Liturgy, 
published in 1869 at Athens. We may guote from it 
briefly as follows: — 

“ He speaks aloud the words through which the Saviour 
instituted the Mystery, Take, eat . . .’ that we may say 
the Amen and therewith signify that by the power of the 
Saviour s institution we accomplish the mystical Supper 
and invoke the Holy Spirit for the hallowing of the pre- 
cious gifts. . . . But also when the most glorious mo- 
ment of the hallowing of the gifts draws near through the 
Invocation of the Holy Spirit, then at the utterance, ‘Thine 
own of Thine own' . . . the choir briefly and the people 
with them, sing the ‘We hymn Thee,’ etc., which is the 
Thanksgiving in brief, which the priest said secretly. Be- 
cause the same begins at the * It is meet and right to hymn 
Thee, to bless Thee, to praise Thee, to thank Thee, to wor- 
ship Thee,’ etc. But the ‘We beseech Thee' of the ‘We 


! N.B. The elements are still regarded as mere bread and 
wine until after the Invocation. 
? See Appendix, pp. 330-331. 


112 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


hymn Thee" corresponds in many ways to the Invocation 
of the Holy Spirit, which is made while the“ We hymn 
Thee' is sung." ! 

Again slightly more at length: “The celebrant para- 
phrasing the triumphal hymn follows out the thanksgiving, 
giving thanks before God also on account of His great 
beneficence in sending His only-begotten Son for our 
salvation. And he narrates briefly, how fulfilling the 
work of our salvation, He instituted His mystical Supper, 
and says aloud the sentences, ‘Take, eat,’ ‘Drink ye all 
of it.’ To these the choir answers ‘Amen,’ so be it: so 
be it, they say, that now also we may be deemed worthy 
of the mystical Supper and that the Bread may be changed 
into the Lord's Body and the Wine into His Blood. 

“After this the celebrant says secretly, ‘ Remember- 
ing therefore His saving commandment and all the 
things wrought on our behalf, . . .' and he speaks aloud, 
lifting the Paten and the Cup together with crossed hands, 
“Thine own of Thine own we offer to Thee on account of 
all and for all,' so that the people also through the choir 
may sing in brief the Thanksgiving, * We hymn Thee, we 
bless Thee, we thank Thee, Lord, and we beseech Thee, 
O our God. And while this thanksgiving is being sung, 
the most important moment of the Liturgy is at hand, 
the hallowing of the precious gifts through the Invoca- 
tion: because the priest then begs and invokes and im- 
plores God to ‘Send down upon us and upon the offered 
gifts His Holy Spirit, and make this bread the precious 
Body of Christ, and that which is in the cup the precious 
Blood of Christ. And as he says, And make this bread,’ 
he seals the bread with the blessing of the sign of the cross 
(through which all the Mysteries are hallowed according 
to primitive tradition, as the great Basil notes): and as 
he says, * That which is in the cup,' he signs the Cup. in 
the same manner; and as he says, ‘Changing them by 


! See Appendix, p. 331. 


THE PATRISTIC WITNESS 113 


Thy Holy Spirit,’ he signs both, the deacon responding 
“ Amen" each time, which he repeats thrice at the last." 1 

It may not be amiss also to quote from the Holy Cate- 
chism of D. N. Bernardakis, published and used with the 
approval of the Patriarch of Constantinople. Thus under 
the question: “By whom and in what manner is the Eu- 
charist fulfilled [consecrated]?" we are told: “. . . For 
the fulfilling of this Mystery the priest takes wine, red 
and pure, and pours it with water into the holy cup, and 
leavened bread of wheat [or barley], and after that in the 
Liturgy he has invoked the Holy Spirit and has blessed 
the holy gifts, the bread is changed into the undefiled 
Body, and the wine with water, into the precious Blood 
of our Lord Jesus Christ.” ? 

Again in answer to the question: “In what way do 
the heterodox Churches differ in rezard to the Mystery 
of the Eucharist?” we are told: “... Another inno- 
vation of the Latin Church concerning this Mystery is 
that, in the holy action the priest does not call upon God 
to hallow the bread and the wine, nor does he bless them, 
as the Catholic Church has received from the beginning 
and practises, but only pronounces simply and, so to 
speak, historically the words of the Lord that are in the 
gospels: ‘This is My Body,’ and ‘This is My Blood,’ and 
believes that through these the holy gifts, though only 
presented, have been hallowed and transformed. The 
enormity of this error any one perceives as soon as he 
considers that this method of hallowing is opposed not 
only to the ancient and unbroken tradition and practice 
of the Catholie Church, as we have said before, but [is 
opposed] also to the essential and proper definition itself 
of the consecration of every Mystery in general, that the 
priest ought to pray, invoking the Divine grace from above 
and blessing the material [part] in the Mystery." ? 


‘See Appendix, pp. 331-332. 2 Ibid., pp. 332-333. 
3 Ibid., p. 333. 


114 THE ΟΟΝΡΕΟΒΑΤΙΟΝ OF THE EUCHARIST 


In concluding this survey of the patristic and liturgical 
witness to the consecration of the Eucharist by God in 
answer to the prayer of the Church to that end in the litur- 
gical Invocation of the Holy Ghost, and in noting how 
loyal the whole Eastern Church has ever been to this 
primitive teaching and practice, we cannot do better than 
to quote the tenth chapter of the Answer of the Great 
Church of Constantinople to the Papal Encyclical on Union, 
put forth in 1895: — 

“The one holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of the 
seven (Ecumenical Councils held that the precious gifts 
are consecrated after the prayer of the Invocation of the 
Holy Ghost by the blessing of the priest, as the ancient 
rituals of Rome and Gaul testify; nevertheless afterwards 
the Papal Church made an innovation in this also, by 
arbitrarily accepting the consecration of the precious 
gifts as taking place along with the utterance of the 
Lord’s words: ‘Take, eat; this is My Body:’ and ‘ Drink, 
ye all of it; for this is My Blood.’ "! 


1 See Appendix, pp. 333-334. 


CHAPTER IV 
THE WITNESS OF THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 


Ir will now be our task to examine into the structure 
and the rationale of the Roman Canon Missae, in order to 
see if it originally differed in any marked degree from the 
Eastern Anaphore in the matter of the consecration 
of the Eucharist. In other words, has what is sometimes 
called “the Western theory of consecration " any root in 
primitive antiquity, or is it a later development, taking 
its rise after the severance of East and West? Since the 
eichth century the Roman rite has ruled supreme over 
Western continental Christendom, althoush for three 
centuries longer the Spanish rite struggled ineffectually 
against it. Was the Canon Missae always understood as 
it is to-day, or has its meaning been perverted since its 
sway became so extended. In other words, has Rome 
mistaken the rationale of her Prayer of Consecration, and 
in accordance with so much of her poliey in other matters, 
not only refused to correct her error, but also endeavoured 
to force it upon others?! 

S. Isidore of Seville, writing at the beginning of the 
seventh century, tells us that the Church everywhere 
celebrated the Eucharist in the same manner? and by 
his description of the Liturgy, and by his definition 

! See above, pp. 95-104 (Chap. III.), in reference to the treat- 
ment of the Armenians, and also in regard to the attempts made 
at the Council of Florence to force an acguiescence from the Greeks 
to the Roman theory of consecration. 

2 See above, p. 81, and Appendix, p. 282. 


3 See above, pp. 81-82, and Appendix, pp. 282-283. 
115 


116 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 
of “sacrifice,"! shows clearly that he regarded the Invo- 
cation to be the instrumental means of Eucharistie con- 
secration, as plainly did S. Cyril of Jerusalem in the 
fourth century. Therefore, before touching upon the 
main question now before us, it will be necessary for us 
to turn our attention to the remnants of the non-Roman 
rites which are to be found. So thorough was the rooting 
up of these Western non-Roman uses that only fragments 
of Galliean missae remain.” Yet those which are known 
to exist bear strong affirmative testimony to S. Isidore’s 
statement and show beyond the shadow of a doubt that 
the ancient Gallican rite was entirely in accord with the 
Eastern Churches in its notion and practice of Eucharistie 
consecration. 

After the recital of the Narrative of Institution, the 
priest said a prayer? (called Post Secreta or Post Myste- 
rium), which corresponded to the two paragraphs of our 
Prayer of Consecration, namely, The Oblation and The 
Invocation, that is to say, he commemorated our Lord’s 
sacrifice and offered the elements in memorial of Him, 
and then besought God to accept and bless the bread and 
wine. Usually the Holy Spirit is mentioned. A few 
examples follow :— 

“ Remembering therefore, and keeping the commands 
of the Only-begotten, we beseech Thee, O Father Almighty, 
that upon these creatures laid upon Thy altar Thou pour 
the Spirit of sanctification, so that by the transfusion 
of the heavenly and invisible sacrament, this bread having 


! See above, p. 80, and Appendix, p. 283. 

? For an account of these, see Duchesne, Christian Worship, etc., 
pp. 151-154. The so-called Gallican Sacramentary (cf. Duchesne, 
op. cit., pp. 158-160) gives us an example of the process whereby 
the Roman rite replaced the Gallican. The invariable Canon 
Missae has displaced the variable Gallican Post Sanctus and Post 
Pridie prayers. 

3 Several examples of this will be fonna in the Appendix, pp. 
334-339, in addition to those translated here. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE Ly 


been changed into the Flesh and the cup into the Blood, 
there may be grace to all, healing to those receiving." ! 

“He added this command, that as often as His Body 
and Blood should be received, commemoration should 
be made of the Lord's Passion. And we doing this ever 
proclaim the glory of Jesus Christ Thy Son, our Lord and 
God. We beseech Thee to bless this sacrifice with Thy 
blessing, and to suffuse it with the dew of the Holy Ghost, 
so that to all receiving it may be a Eucharist pure, true, 
valid, through Jesus Christ Thy Son, our Lord and God, 
who liveth and reigneth with Thee and with the Holy 
Ghost, world without end. Amen."“ 

“ Keeping these commands and precepts, O Lord, we 
humbly pray, that Thou vouchsafe to receive and bless 
and sanctify this sacrifice: so that it become for us a valid 
Eucharist, in Thy name and in the name of Thy Son and 
of the Holy Ghost, unto transformation of the Body and 
Blood of our Lord God, Jesus Christ Thy Only-begotten; 
by whom Thou dost create all things, having created dost 
bless them, having blessed them dost sanctify them, 
having sanctified them dost bestow them, Ὁ God, who in 
perfect Trinity livest and reignest, world without end." ? 

Occasionally we find the Invocation preceding “ the 
Narrative of Institution, for no exact moment of conse- 
eration having been fixed upon in early times, the Eucha- 
ristic prayer was often loose in its construction; always 

1 Missale Richenovense, p. 21. See Appendix, pp. 334-335. 

? Missale Richenovense, pp. 26-27. See Appendix, p. 335. 

3 Missale Gothicum, Post Secreta for the feast of the Cireumci- 
sion. See Appendix, pp. 335-336. 

4 Cf. the Sacramentary of Serapion. See above, p. 42, and 
Appendix, p. 252. Cf.also the Liturgy of S. Mark (Brightman, 
Liturgies Eastern and Western, p. 132); the Liturgy of the Coptie 
Jacobites (Brightman, op. cit., p. 176); and a recently published 
Egyptian Mass (Dictionnaire d' Archéologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie, 
col. 1907). The Egyptian rite seems to have had a preliminary 
Invoeation before the Narrative of Institution as well as the 
normal Epiklesis after the Oblation. 


118 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


containing, however, the two primal factors, derived from 
the original institution, of thankful commemoration of 
God's mercies, and of impetration of the Divine bless- 
ing upon the oblations of bread and wine. The following 
instance indicates plainly that the Narrative Qui pridie 
was regarded as an epexegetical quotation : — 

“By Thy command, Lord, all things were made in 
heaven and earth, in sea and in all deeps. To Thee 
patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, confessors, and 
all the Saints give thanks. And we also doing this, be- 
seech Thee that Thou gladly receive these spiritual obla- 
tions and pure offerings. We pray Thee to bless this 
sacrifice with Thy blessing, and suffuse it with the dew 
of Thy Holy Ghost; that it may be for all a valid Eucha- 
rist. Through Christ our Lord. Who the day before." ! 

The Mozarabic rite is preserved for us in a few manu- 
scripts dating from the period of its overthrow as the na- 
tional rite of Spain and in the Mozarabic Missal edited 
under the auspices of Cardinal Ximenes in 1500. This 
last bears the marks of the era in which it was published, 
yet at the same time there is embedded in it manifold 
evidence of the old rationale of Eucharistic consecra- 
tion as held in the Churches of the peninsula. The late 
interpretation of the Roman Canon Missae has been 
read into it as far as may be, the rubrics of the Romano- 
toledan rite having been introduced? and a brief fixed 
Invocation placed between the Post Sanctus and the Nar- 
rative of Institution. This last runs as follows:— 

“ Be present, be present, Jesus, Thou good High priest 
in our midst, like as Thou wast among Thy disciples: 


1 Missale Gothicum, Post Sanctus for the Vigil of Easter. See 
Appendix, p. 337. 

? Le. Liber Ordinum, . . . publié pour la premiere fois . . . 
par Dom M. Férotin, Paris, 1904, Introduction, p. xi. seq. 
Cf. also British Museum (Additional) MSS. 30,844; 30,845; 30,846. 

3 Cf. Liber Ordinum, p. xiv. 


ΤΗΕ ROMAN CANON MISSAE 119 


sanctify this oblation, that having been sanctified by the 
hands of Thy holy Angel we may receive them, Thou 
holy Lord and Redeemer eternal." ! 

This Missal is most interesting in that it contains so 
great an abundance of material in a fossilized state.’ 
Even as it is, revised in a definite direction for publication, 
it gives us many examples of beautiful Post Pridie prayers 
parallel to the Eastern Invocation. Indeed, you will not 
find many Post Pridie prayers in the whole Missal which 
do not contain a definite, though brief, petition for the 
hallowing of the oblations of bread and wine. An ex- 
ample or two must suffice. 

“This doing, Holy Father, we set forth before Thee the 
death of Thy Only-begotten, by which we are redeemed, 
as He hath commanded until His coming again. We pro- 
claim that He died for us: do Thou bestow on us the 
honour of dying with Him. We believe that He rose 
again: do Thou grant that we may be delivered from our 


! See Appendix, p. 950. 

?'The process of adaptation to the then dominant theory of 
consecration was not completed. The insertion of Adesto before 
the Narrative of Institution and the introduction of the Romano- 
toledan rubrics have left untouched the phraseology of the Invo- 
cations found in so many of the Post Pridie prayers, as well as some 
that are found in prayers Post Sanctus, and even in the Illations. 
In a few places, possibly, alterations have been made in the interest 
of the Roman theory of consecration, but not often enough to im- 
pair the witness of the Missal as a whole to the primitive belief 
on this point. Crude though the Mozarabic Anaphorze often are, 
and diffuse, they show us how the two chief elements of the 
Eucharistic Prayer, viz., praise, and petition for blessing 
upon the oblations of bread and wine, were present to the minds 
of those who framed the manifold examples contained in the Moza- 
rabie Missal. (Cf. Church Quarterly Review, Vol. LXIII., No. 126, 
Jany. 1907, pp. 315-322 ) Several examples, in addition to those 
cited in the text, are given in the Appendix, pp. 340-358. 

* Cf. Watterich, Der Konsekrationsmoment, etc., pp. 234-235. 
Out of 151 Post Pridie prayers, 138 have a more or less distinctly 
expressed petition for the consecration of the elements. 


120 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


daily falls. We believe and we proclaim that He will 
come again to judgment: do Thou grant us so to live, that 
we may deserve to hold His dread coming again, as a bless- 
ing. And we humbly beseech Thee to accept and bless 
this oblation also, as Thou didst accept the gifts of Thy 
righteous servant Abel, and the sacrifice of our forefather 
Abraham, and that which Thy high priest Melchizedek 
offered. Here, I beseech Thee, let Thy blessing invisibly 
descend as of old time it descended visibly upon the sac- 
rifices of our fathers. Let the sweet-smelling savour 
ascend in the sight of Thy divine Majesty from this Thy 
glorious altar by the hands of Thy Angel, and let Thy 
Holy Spirit come down upon these mysteries, that He may 
sanetify the oblations and the vows,both of those who 
offer and of those who stand by; that whosoever of us 
partake of this Body may receive a medicine for our souls, 
to heal the wounds of our hearts, to drive out all vain 
thoughts from the mind, to root out hatred and earthly 
lusts, to Implant undying charity which covereth the mul- 
titude of sins. So that indeed this precious Blood of 
Thy Son our Lord may so wash away our sins when we 
drink thereof, as once when poured out it redeemed us." ! 

“We make, O Lord, the memorial of Thy Son, Jesus 
Christ our Lord, who hath redeemed us by His death, and 
exalted us by His resurrection. Who to-day came in to 
His disciples by closed doors, and to one of them in doubt 
offered Himself to be handled by bodily touch. Where- 
fore, through Him, O God our Father, we beseech Thee 
to sanctify these oblations by that Spirit by whom Thou 
didst once breathe upon Thy believing disciples. And 
thus may we by communion of this sacrifice receive the 
gift of holiness, as they obtained the commission of preach- 
ing when Thou didst breathe upon them.” ? 

“Openly have we proclaimed, nor shall we ever hold our 


! Post Pridie for Easter Monday. See Appendix, p. 344. 
7 Post Pridie for Low Sunday. See Appendix, p. 345. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE "ONE 


peace, that Thou, O Christ, didst suffer for the redemp- 
tion of us miserable sinners, that Thou didst rise again 
for the salvation of the faithful, that Thou didst go up 
to heaven for the strength of those who strive, that Thou 
wilt come to be the judge of quick and dead. And know- 
ing this, O Lord, in order that that dread day may draw 
nigh more gently by Thy intercession, we offer these gifts. 
And that when we receive them they may avail us for 
salvation, let Thy Holy Spirit come upon them, Who in 
likeness of flame took up the offerings of Manoah. Let 
Thy Holy Spirit come and quicken them, Who by the 
heat of fire consumed the whole burnt offering of Elijah 
the prophet. Let Thy Holy Spirit come and quicken 
them, Who by the dividing of fiery tongues visited the 
hearts of Thy Apostles. So that when received in our 
hearts they may afford us salvation, both now and for- 
ever." ! 

The publication of the Liber Ordinum by Dom Férotin 
places within reach of the student some of the manuscript 
remains of the old Spanish rite. From this we see clearly 
that in the eleventh century the Conformatio sacramenti 
was regarded (as formerly) as consisting of the Post Sanc- 
tus, the Qui pridie, and the Post Pridie; and also that the 
fixed Invocation inserted before the Narrative of Institu- 
tion in the Missal as published by Cardinal Ximenes had 
no place there in the earlier and untampered rite“ A 
study of any of the manuscript remnants of the Mozarabie 
rite can hardly do aught but inerease the conviction of 
the student that Spain was of old at one with the whole 
East, in the manner of consecrating the Eucharist. The 
fragments of the tenth century Mozarabic Missals in the 
British Museum ? alone afford evidence of the fact that 

! Post Pridie for Ascension Day. See Appendix, p. 345. 

2 Liber Ordinum, cols. 237-239. Appendix, pp. 354-355. Cf. 
Paléographie M usicale, Vol. V., pp. 55-56, note 9; and Mozarabic. 


Missal, P. L., Ixxxv., cols. 549-550, note e. 
* Additional MSS. 30,844; 30,845; 30,846. 


122 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


the Invocation was not always written out in full any 
more than was the Narrative and that the priest supplied 
it from memory where necessary.' One of the Post Pridie 
prayers given above? is contained twice, in one place 
complete, in the other case stopping abruptly after the 
words, “ And that when we receive them they may avail 
us for salvation." ? Obviously the celebrant would finish 
out the rest from memory. 

The evidence of Gallican and of Spanish rites tells the 
same story as that of all the East. The consecration of 
the Christian sacrifice was made by the * mystical prayer," 
that the oblation of the two fruits of the earth in memorial 
of Christ's passion might be sanctified by the unseen 
working of the Holy Ghost, and be conformed to 
Christ's Body and Blood.* One Eucharist, one rationale 
of the consecration thereof in East and West, — was Rome 
alone an exception to this unity ? 

Let us then turn our attention to the Canon Missae 
and examine it in the various stages of its history. First, 
its text? and the meaning of its parts and their inter- 
relation, laying aside the rubries that accompany it 


! Cf. John Johnson, The Unbloody Sacrifice, etc., Part IL, 
Chap. IL, $ IL, Works, A.C.L., Vol. IL, pp. 175-176, note zo, 
esp. ^(2).... It is reasonable to believe, that the Priests in that 
age could as readily supply the defect of the Oblation and Prayer 
for the benediction of the Spirit, as they could that of the Words of 
Institution; and since they all follow one after the other, therefore 
the same item, or ‘etc.’ might serve to remind the Priest of all 
three." 

? Post Pridie for Ascension Day. See Appendix, p. 345. 

3 [bid , especially “N. B." following. 

* Cf. S. Isidore of Seville, quoted above pp. 80-81; and Ap- 
pendix, pp. 282-283. 

5 The text in the Appendix (pp. 359-351) is from the Gelasian 
Sacramentary, the earliest known MS. which contains it. Its para- 
graphs are lettered, and each word is numbered, in order that it 
may thus the more easily serve as a standard whereby textual 
variations can be noted, and the position of rubrics readily be seen. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 123 


to-day, must be considered. Then the ceremonial that 
was used in connection with it, in the eighth century, 
for example, the earlier rubries, and their significance 
claim our notice. Thus doing we shall find it originally 
en rapport with the old Gallican and Mozarabie rites and 
with those of the East as well, and then from the evidence 
that comes to hand we can trace the steps whereby the 
differentiation of the Roman rite from the unity of Chris- 
tendom ! was accomplished and stereotyped. 

Translated into English, we shall see not only its plain 
meaning, but also its simplicity and beauty, in spite of 
its somewhat disjointed workmanship? The text fol- 
lowed in the translation is that of the present Roman 
Missal, which differs but slightly from that of the earliest 
exemplar known to us.? 

A. “Therefore, most merciful ether: through Jesus 
Christ Thy Son, our Lord, we humbly pray and beseech 
Thee, that Thou wouldst accept and bless these > gifts, 
these x1 presents, these>holy undefiled sacrifices, which 
we offer unto Thee, especially for Thy holy Catholic 
Church: which do Thou vouchsafe to pacify, guard, unite, 
and govern throughout the whole world, together with 
Thy servant N. our Pope; N. our Bishop; “ and all or- 
thodox believers and professors of the Catholic and Apos- 
tolic Faith.“ 


! Note also an Ambrosian Post Pridie for Maundy Thursday, 
p. 358. This is still used in the Ambrosian rite, but is now merely 
an insertion between Nobis quoque and the concluding doxology 
of the Canon Missae on that day. 

? See an article by the Rev. Edward Burbidge on the Origin 
of the Roman Canon in The Guardian for March 24, 1897, p. 471; 
also Paléographie Musicale, Vol. V., pp. 55-96. Cf. A New His- 
tory of the Book of Common Prayer, Frere’s revised ‘ Procter,” 
London, 1901, pp. 430-449. 

> The crosses are given in the text according to the present 
Roman use. 

"4 This clause is not found in the Gelasian Sacramentary. 


124 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


B. “ Remember, O Lord, Thy servants and handmaids, 
N.and N., and all here present, whose faith and devotion 
are known to Thee: 'for whom we offer, or! who offer to 
Thee this sacrifice of praise, for themselves and for all 
their own, for the redemption of their souls, for the hope 
of salvation and well-being, and who pay their vows unto 
Thee, eternal God, living and true. 

C. “In communion with and honouring the memory, 
especially -of the glorious ever Virgin Mary, Mother of - 
our God and Lord Jesus Christ; and also of Thy blessed 
Apostles and Martyrs, Peter and Paul, Andrew, James, 
John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon 
and Thaddeus, Linus, Cletus, Clement, Xystus, Cornelius, 
Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas 
and Damian, and all Thy Saints; by whose merits and 
prayers do Thou grant that in all things we may be de- 
fended by the aid of Thy protection. Through the same 
Christ our Lord. Amen. 

D. “ This oblation, therefore, of our service, and that of 
Thy whole family, we beseech Thee, O Lord, graciously 
“to accept; *and to order our days in Thy peace, and to 
command that we be delivered from eternal damnation, 
and be numbered in the flock of Thine elect? Through 
Christ our Lord. Amen. 

E. “ And this oblation, we beseech Thee, O God, do Thou 
vouchsafe to make in all things blessed, approveKed, 
ratifisfeed, reasonable, and acceptable; that it may be- 
come for us the Body»I« and Blood» of Thy most dearly 
beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. 

F. “Who, the day before He suffered, took bread into 
His holy and venerable hands, and with eyes lifted up to 
heaven, unto Thee, O God, His Almighty Father, giving 
thanks to Thee, He blessI«ed, brake, and gave to His 

'-! This clause is not found in the Gelasian Sacramentary. 


?? This clause is said to have been added by Pope Gregory the 
Great. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 125 


diseiples, saying: Take, and eat ye all of this. For this 
is My Body. Likewise, after supper, taking also this 
excellent eup into His holy and venerable hands: in like 
manner giving thanks to Thee, He bles»fed, and gave 
to His diseiples, saying: Take, and drink ye all of it. 
For this is the Cup of My Blood of the New and eternal 
Testament: the Mystery of Faith; which shall be shed 
for you, and for many, for the remission of sins. As often 
as ye do these things, ye shall do them in remembrance of 
Me. 

G. “ Wherefore, O Lord, we Thy servants, and likewise 
Thy holy people, having in remembrance ' the blessed 
Passion of the same Christ Thy Son, our Lord, together 
with His Resurrection from the dead, and also His glorious 
Ascension into heaven, do offer unto Thy excellent 
Majesty, of Thy gifts and bounties, a pure>offering, a 
holy»Koffering, a spotless» offering, the holy»I«bread of 
eternal life, and the eup»I«of everlasting salvation. 

H. “ Upon which do Thou vouchsafe to look with favour- 
able and gracious countenance, as Thou didst vouchsafe 
to aecept the gifts of Thy just servant Abel, and the sac- 
rifice of our forefather Abraham, and that which Thy 
high priest Melchizedek offered unto Thee, ? a holy sacri- 
fice, a spotless offering.’ 

I. “ We humbly beseech Thee, Almighty God, command 
these things to be carried up by the hands of Thy holy? 
Angel to Thine altar on high, in the sight of Thy divine 
Majesty, that as many of us as shall, from this participation 
of the altar, receive the most sacred Body »f«and Blood > 
of Thy Son, may be filled with all heavenly benediction 
and grace. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen. 

J. “ Remember, O Lord, Thy servants and handmaids, 
N. and N., who have gone before us with the sign of faith, 

1 Some MSS. insert here, “the honoured Nativity and.” 


22 Pope Leo I. is said to have added these words. 
3 This word “holy” is not found in the Gelasian Sacramentary. 


126 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


and repose in the sleep of peace. To these, Ο Lord, and 
to all who rest in Christ, grant, we pray Thee, a place of 
refreshment, light, and peace. Through the same Christ 
our Lord. Amen.! 

K. “To us also, Thy sinful servants, who trust in the 
abundance of Thy mercies, do Thou vouchsafe to give 
some lot and fellowship with Thy holy Apostles and 
Martyrs; with John, Stephen, Matthias, Barnabas, 
Ignatius, Alexander, Marcellinus, Peter, Felicitas, Per- 
petua, Agatha, Lucy, Agnes, Cecilia, Anastasia, and all 
Thy Saints: into whose company we beseech Thee to 
admit us, not weighing our merits, but pardoning our 
offenees. Through Christ our Lord. 

L. “By whom, O Lord, Thou dost always create, sanc- 
tiI«y, quicksfen, bless», and bestow upon us all these 
good things. 

“ Bye Him, and with»I«Him, and ine Him, in the unity 
of the Holy »I«Ghost, all honour and glory is unto Thee, 
O God the Father»«Almighty. World without end. 
Amen." 

The first paragraph consists of ἃ petition to God to 
bless the oblations, followed by a petition on behalf 
of the Church, the Pope, the Bishop of the diocese, and 
all Christians. The second paragraph is a commemoration 
of the living, and this is followed by the third paragraph 
setting forth the communion of saints and requesting that: 
their prayers may be made on our behalf. The fourth 
paragraph asks for the acceptance of the oblation, for 
peace, and for deliverance from evil. The fifth paragraph 
makes petition for a blessing on the elements, that they 
become the Body and Blood of Christ? Next in order 


1 The Memento of the departed is wanting in the Gelasian 
Sacramentary and some other early MSS. 

? Cf. the Egyptian rite as represented in the Sacramentary of 
Serapion, the Liturgy of S. Mark, and the Liturgy of the Coptic 
Jacobites. See p. 117, note 4. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 127 


is the Narrative of Institution, which, with the exception 
of the epithets applied to our Lord’s hands, and the ex- 
pression “ the Mystery of Faith” put into our Lord's mouth 
in the giving of the cup, is in close accord with the New 
Testament accounts of the Institution. Then follows the 
usual paragraph wherein Christ’s death, resurrection, and 
ascension are commemorated, and the gifts of bread 
and wine presented as memorials before God. Next 
God is asked favourably to regard these offerings, as of 
old He looked with favour upon those of Abel, Abraham, 
and Melchizedek. Next comes the petition that God 
would bid these oblations to be carried up to His heavenly 
altar by the hands of His holy Angel, so that as the result 
of this exaltation of the oblations, those who receive, by 
partaking of the elements, the Body and Blood of Christ, 
may be filled with grace and. blessing. 

The equivalence of this paragraph (Supplices te) to the 
Invocation of other Liturgies has been most clearly es- 
tablished by Dr. Hoppe in a thorough and scholarly 
treatise published about forty years ago, wherein too he 
showed the persistence of this original notion in the face 
of the later theory to which the Roman Church is com- 
mitted. In view of all the evidence reviewed by Dr. 
Hoppe, there is no explanation which will fit the facts 
of the case save that the Roman Epiklesis uses symbolical 
or metaphorical language to express what all other 
Liturgies express more plainly. In other words, — the 
“ heavenly altar" stands for the human nature of Christ 
at God’s right hand, the “complete carrying up" of the 
elements is the change into Christ’s Body and Blood, and 
the “hand of God’s holy Angel” is the operation of the 
Holy Ghost. In the time when the Canon Missae was 


1 Die Epiklesis der griechischen und orientalischen Liturgieen 
und der römische Consekrationskanon, von Dr. Ludwig Augustin 
Hoppe, Schaffhausen, 1864. 

2 Op. eit. (Part I.), pp. 93-210, esp. pp. 116-191. 


128 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


framed (surely not later than the early part of the fourth 
century), those who used it (and that in all probability 
alongside of a Greek Anaphora of the Alexandrian type) 
would have understood the celebrant in the Supplices te 
to pray: “We humbly beseech Thee, Almighty God, 
command these things to be translated (or transformed) 
to the Body and Blood of Christ by the act of Thy Holy 
Spirit, that as many of us as shall, from this participation 
of the altar? receive the most sacred Body and Blood of 
Thy Son, may be filled with all heavenly benediction 
and grace." Upon this hypothesis we can understand 
many things otherwise inexplicable. For example, the 
Roman Canon Missae, and the Latin Liturgy, seem to 
have displaced the Greek Anaphora and Liturgy alongside 
of which they were originally used,’ and that without appar- 
ently a suspicion of any change of rationale. Then again 
the words of Gelasius I.* and those ascribed to Gregory the 
Great ? are entirely clear only in reference to such an under- 
standing of the Canon Missae, and it 1s not necessary to 


! Cf. Duchesne, op. cit., pp. 176-177; Frere-Procter, op. cit., 
p.440. Note the curious reference of the author of Quaestiones 
Veteris et Novi Testamenti (see Appendix, pp. 251-252) to the 
paragraph Supra quae, in which he regards the mention of Mel- 
chizedek as signifying the Holy Spirit. 

? The variants of the latter part of the Supplices te do but serve 
to strengthen the conviction that the “translation of the elements 
to the heavenly altar by the hand of the holy Angel" is the meta- 
phorical equivalent of the prayer for their transformation by the 
operation of the Holy Spirit into Christ's Body and Blood. “ From 
this sanctification of the altar,” and “from this altar of sanctifica- 
tion," instead of ''from this participation of the altar," indicate 
very strongly that the consecration of the elements is considered to 
have been effected by the “translation” of them already prayed 
for. See Appendix, p. 302. 

3 Cf. Burbidge, op. cit. (see above, p. 123, note 2), and Frere- 
Procter, op. cit., p. 440. 

* See above, p. 74, and Appendix, pp. 276-277. 

5 See above, p. 79, and Appendix, pp. 280-281. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 129 


suppose (against all the evidence) that the Roman Church 
once used a plainly worded Epiklesis in the Liturgy and 
afterward laid it aside. Moreover the eguivalence of 
the Canon Missae (in regard to Eucharistie consecration) 
with all other Liturgies made easy the process whereby 
it supplanted all other Anaphore in Western Christen- 
dom. At the same time this symbolical or metaphorical 
cast of language in the Roman Invocation made it easier ! 
to slight its original significance when the germ of the new 
theory made its appearance in the ninth century, viz. 
that the repetition of Christ’s words of declaration, ‘ This 
is My Body, This is My Blood," effected the consecration. 
This theory, we may note in passing, shows great confu- 
sion of mind upon the part of its promulgators, for it 
fogs the clear distinction between the original institution 
of the Eucharist by Christ and the observance of that 
service by His Church,’ and, ignoring the plain statements 
of Scripture, represents Our Lord's words of administra- 
tion as the consecration, which consecration He had 
wrought by His blessing? before He administered the 
sacrament to His Apostles. This theory also utterly defies 
the universal use of the quoted Narrative of Christ’s 
Institution as the pattern and charter for our keeping 
of His Eucharistie memorial, as the prelude and ground 
of our oblation of the elements of bread and wine in re- 
membrance of Him and of our impetration for God’s 
acceptance and blessing upon them. 

The best comment upon this prayer (1.6. Supplices te) is 
that of Monsignor Duchesne, who says: 

“This prayer is far from exhibiting the precision of the 
Greek formularies, in which there is a specific mention of 
the grace prayed for, that is, the intervention of the 
Holy Spirit to effeet the transformation of the bread and 

1 Cf. Florus, On the Exposition of the Mass, pp. 150-154 below, 


and Appendix, p. 381-384. 
? Cf. Chap. II., pp. 29, 33. 3 See above, Chap. II., pp. 25-27. 


130 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. It is true, 
nevertheless, (1) that it occupies, in regard to the subject- 
matter and the logical connection of the formulary, the 
exact place of the Greek Epiclesis; and (2) that it also 
is a prayer to God for His intervention in the mystery. 
But whilst the Greek Liturgies use here clear and simple 
terms, the Roman Liturgy embodies its meaning in 
symbolical forms. It prays that the angel of the Lord 
may take the oblation from the visible altar and bear it 
to the highest heaven, to the invisible altar, before the 
shrine of the Divine Majesty. This symbolical trans- 
ference is in a contrary sense to that implied in the Greek 
formulary; it involves not the descent of the Holy Spirit 
upon the oblation, but the elevation by God’s angel of the 
oblation to heaven. But in both cases alike it is after it 
has been brought near to, and has participated in, the Di- 
vine Virtue that it is called the Body and Blood of Christ."! 


! Origines du Culte Chrétien, par l'abbé L. Duchesne (deux- 
ieme édition), Paris, 1898, p. 173. 

“ Cette priere est loin d'avoir la précision des formules grecgues 
ot. l'on spécifie expressément la grace demandée, c'est-à-dire 
l'intervention du Saint-Esprit pour opérer la transformation du 
pain et du vin au corps et au sang de Jésus-Christ. Il n'en est 
pas moins vrai : l? qu'elle occupe, dans la suite matérielle et logique 
de la formule, exactement la méme place que l'épiclése grecque; 
2? qu'elle est aussi une priere adressée à Dieu pour qu'il intervienne 
dans le mystére. Mais, au lieu que les liturgies grecques s'ex- 
priment en termes clairs ct simples, la liturgie romaine s'enveloppe 
ici de formes symboliques. Elle demande que l'ange du Seigneur 
prenne l'oblation sur l'autel visible et la porte au plus haut des 
cieux, sur l'autel invisible élevé devant le tróne de la majesté 
divine. Le mouvement symbolique est de sens contraire à celui 
des formules grecques: ce n'est pas le Saint-Esprit qui descend 
vers l'oblation, c'est l'oblation qui est emportée au ciel par l'ange 
de Dieu. Mais, dans un cas comme dans l'autre, c'est aprés son 
rapprochement, sa communication, avec la vertu divine qu'on 
parle d'elle comme du corps et du sang du Christ." 

The translation in the text is from the English edition, Chris- 
tian Worship: Its Origin and Evolution, S.P.C. K., London, 1903, 
pp. 181-182. 


ΤΗΕ ROMAN CANON MISSAE 131 


No other words need be added to these which so thor- 
oughly recognize this paragraph of the Canon Missae as 
the Invocation of the Roman rite. 

After the Invocation follows the commemoration of the 
dead in Christ, and a second commemoration of the Saints, 
and the whole prayer is coneluded by a double doxology. 

Surely there can be but one opinion regarding the Canon 
Missae in its textual meaning. It is the complete paral- 
lel in rationale of the Eucharistie Prayer of the Eastern 
Liturgies, and of the Western “ Conformation of the Sacra- 
ment.” S. Isidore was right. In his day, at least, the 
whole world celebrated the Eucharist in the same manner, 
the oblations of the Church were consecrated by her 
mystical prayer to God for that end.! 

The Gallican rite was supplanted by the Roman rite 
in the latter part of the eighth century in France. Alcuin 
(735-804 A.D.) was active in spreading the Roman use. 
In his Disputatio Puerorum (Chap. X., “Of the Mass") 
he applies S. Isidore’s description of the seven prayers 
of the Mass to the Roman rite? The whole prayer from 
Te igitur, i.e. the Canon Missae, he puts under the heading 
of Confirmatio sacramenti, thus showing most plainly the 
equivalenee of the two rites in the consecration of the 
Eucharist. Moreover, it stands to reason that the Galliean 
rite could not have been so quickly displaced by the 
Roman, if the latter had possessed a different rationale 
of the central prayer of the Liturgy. Alcuin in his Liber 
Sacramentorum has preserved for us a few of the old Post 
Pridie prayers, though putting them in connection with 
the offertory as prayers Super oblata, the Canon Missae 
having displaced all variants formerly used in the Con- 
formatio sacramenti. One of these is quite striking. 

“We are mindful, O eternal God, Almighty Father, of 
the glorious passion of Thy Son, of His resurrection also, 
and of His ascension into heaven. "Therefore we beseech 


! See Appendix, pp. 282-283. 2 [bid., p. 366. 


132 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Thy Majesty, Ο God, that the prayers of our humility 
may ascend in the sight of Thy tender mercy, and that 
there may descend upon this bread and upon this cup 
the fulness of Thy Divinity. May there descend also, 
O Lord, the incomprehensible and unseen Majesty of 
Thy Holy Spirit, as of old He was wont to descend upon 
the offerings of the Fathers. Through the same Lord." ! 
Old associations could not suffer the entire abandonment 
of this prayer, although its concluding petition, that the 
elements might become the Body and Blood of Christ, 
would be dropped in its new position. 

Aleuin had a large share in the Caroline Books, sub- 
mitted to the Council of Frankfort in 794? In Book II., 
Chap. XXVII., the consecration of the Eucharist is 
touched upon. The allusions made are of such a charac- 
ter as to show indubitably that the consecration of the 
Eucharist was referred to the prayer Supplices te of the 
Canon Missae, and that the Narrative of Institution was 
recited purely historically and as the charter for our obedi- 
ent observance of Christ's holy rite, ordained by Him as 
the Christian memorial sacrifice which supplants the rites 
of the old dispensation. We read as follows: — 

“The sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord 
ordained by that same Mediator of God and men for the 
commemoration of His passion and of our salvation, is 
consecrated by the hand of the priest and by the Invoca- 
tion of the Divine Name. . . . At the consecration of 
these [the elements] the vested priest, mingling the sup- 
plieations of the people standing around with his own 
prayers, groaning within himself makes memorial of the 
Lord's passion, and resurrection from the dead, and also 
of His most glorious ascension into heaven, and earnestly 
requests that these [the elements] be carried by the hand 
of the Angel unto God's heavenly altar and into the 


! See Appendix, p. 366. 
? Cf. Dictionnaire ď Arch. Chrét. et de Lit., col. 1077. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 193 


presence of His majesty. . . . For the very Creator of 
the human race, who for our sake and for our salvation, 
did not abhor to take our flesh, when he established both 
the end of the old Covenant and the health-giving begin- 
ning of the New, on the eve of His most sacred passion, 
in Himself as the corner-stone joining both walls, and 
(according to the Apostle) making of both one, having 
taken bread, and having blessed and broken it, gave this 
salutary precept to His disciples: ‘Take ye, said He, 
‘and eat, this is My Body.’ And likewise taking the cup 
after supper, He gave it to His disciples, saying: ‘Take 
ye and drink, for this is My Blood of the New and eternal 
Covenant which for you and for many shall be poured out 
for the remission of sins. As often as ye do these things, 
ye shall do them for My memorial.’ . . . Much, therefore, 
as beyond what can be surveyed by the mind’s eye, does 
the sacrament of the Lord’s Body and Blood differ from 
likenesses limned by the skill of painters: since that for- 
sooth is consecrated by the iavisible operation of the Spirit 
of God, these visibly by the hand of the artist; that is 
consecrated by the priest by the Invocation of the Divine 
Name, these are limned by the painter with the skill 
of human art; that is carried up by the hands of the 
Angel unto God’s heavenly altar, these made by human 
hands through art are placed for the gaze of the admiring 
upon the wall.’’! 

It is evident that the “symbolical forms” under which 
the Roman Invocation was clothed conveyed the same 
thoughts and expressed the same intentions as did the 
more explicit Eastern and Gallican Invocations. Else 
Theodulph of Orleans (f 821 A.p.) could not have written 
as follows: — 

“For it is a saving sacrifice which in the Old Testa- 
ment Melchizedek, King of Salem, offered in type of the 
Body and Blood of the Lord, and which in the New, the 


! See Appendix, pp. 366-367. 


134 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


same Mediator of God and men fulfilled before He was 
betrayed, when taking bread and a cup and blessing them 
and giving them to His disciples He bade that these things 
be done in memorial of Him. Therefore this mystery 
of sacrifice, the old offerings being abandoned and brought 
to an: end, the Church celebrates, offering bread on ac- 
count of the ‘living Bread that came down from heaven,’ 
wine on account of Him who said, ‘I am the true Vine’; 
to the end that, by the visible oblation of the priests, 
and by the invisible consecration of the Holy Ghost, the 
bread and wine may be translated unto the dignity of 
the Body and Blood of the Lord."! 

Similarly Agobard of Lyons (f 840 A.D.) says: — 

“For the divine sacraments, that is to say, baptism 
and the consecration of the Body and Blood of the Lord, 
and other things in which the health and life of the faith- 
ful consist, are so great and so holy, that neither by the 
merits of good men can they be improved, nor by the 
wickedness of evil men can they be lowered in efficiency, 
since at the Invocation of the High Priest, not by human 
power, but by the might of the Holy Ghost are they in- 
effably perfected." ? 

Pope Nicholas Τ., writing to the Emperor Michael 
(860 A.D.), uses language, in reference to Eucharistie con- 
secration, in consonance with the Eastern and universal 
ancient tradition of the Church, when he says of the 
Lord's table, * Because indeed it has been consecrated 
by God's help and has received a blessing, whereby also 
it is constituted a holy table; the bread likewise, which 
is offered upon it, is indeed common bread: but when it 
has been consecrated in the sacrament, it becomes in truth, 
and is called, the Body of Christ. So also the wine, a 
thing of slight present value before the blessing, after the 
sanctification of the Spirit is made the Blood of Christ." ? 


! See Appendix, pp. 367-308. ? [bid., p. 368. 
3 Ibid., p. 369. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 135 


Rabanus Maurus (776-856 A.p.) comments upon the 
order of the mass (in part) as follows: — 

* After the angelic hymn which the whole clergy sings 
together in chorus, follows the prayer by which the sacra- 
ment of the Body and Blood of the Lord is consecrated, 
which begins thus, Te igitur." ' Commenting on the 
word “sacrifices” (these holy undefiled sacrifices) he says, 
“Sacrifices are those things which are consecrated with 
prayers."? On the Narrative and on the opening words 
of the Oblation, he says: — 

* And He wished that bread and wine be offered by us 
to Him and by Him be divinely consecrated, and that 
His faithful people believe the mystery to be true which 
He delivered to His disciples saying: ‘Take ye and eat 
all of this.” Likewise of the cup He said: ‘Take ye and 
drink all of it.” And when He lifted up His eyes to heaven 
and gave thanks to the Father, He taught us thereby 
that we ought always to pray the Father that He vouch- 
safe to perfect so great a sacrament through our hands. 
And when He said, ‘As often as ye do these things, ye 
shall do them in remembrance of Me,’ He bade us to be 
continually mindful of that passion which He sustained 
for us, and especially at the time when we are celebrating 
this sacrament, and trust ourselves to His mercy and 
goodness. Wherefore, O Lord, we Thy servants, and like- 
wise Thy holy people, having in remembrance, etc. What 
was commanded him by the Lord, this the priest professes 
to have done. For therefore the priests of the Son of 
God, that is, of the Lord Jesus Christ, ought to be faith- 
fully mindful, because they celebrate mass, and offer 
sacrifice instructed by Christ’s example; and they ought 
to know what they celebrate, because foolish is the request, 
if one requests he knows not what.” ? 

1 Liber de sacris ordinibus, ete., Chap. XIX. See Appendix, 


p. 369. 
2 Ibid., p. 369. 3 Ibid., p. 370. 


136 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF ΤΗΕ EUCHARIST 


Shortly after this, concerning the Oblation of the gifts, 
he says: — 

“O Lord, mindful of all Thy loving kindnesses which 
we have mentioned, we offer to Thy Majesty a pure offer- 
ing, that is with a pure heart, for pure is Thy Body which 
we believe to be made of this Bread. A holy offering, 
because Thou didst sanctify Thy Body when Thou tookest 
manhood into God, and do Thou now sanctify this bread 
that it may become Thy Body. A spotless offering, be- 
cause, though without spot of sin, Thou didst suffer for 
us. The holy bread oj life eternal, because Thou art the 
living Bread, who camest down from heaven, and in this 
bread sanctified by Thee Thou didst will us to receive 
Thy Body, and through the cup of Thy passion didst will 
us to take Thy Blood. Do Thou sanctify this offering 
that it may become for us Thy Body and Thy Blood." ! 

The question at once suggests itself, Could Rabanus 
Maurus by any possibility have commented thus in his 
consideration of the memorial Oblation, if the notion had 
ever entered his mind that the elements had been already 
consecrated by, and at, the rehearsal of our Lord's words 
of declaration in the Narrative of Institution? To this 
question there can be but one answer, No, most em- 
phatieally and unhesitatingly, No.? 

With regard to the Invocation proper we find him say- 
ing: — 

“Both in bread and wine He willed us to copy the mys- 
tery of His passion, when in giving the bread and the cup 
to His disciples He said, “This is My Body; and this is 
the cup of My Blood.’ And we ought to entreat that as 
the oblations of the aforesaid fathers were accepted, so 
might ours become accepted. We humbly beseech Thee, 

1 Liber de sacris ordinibus, ete. Chap. XIX. See Appendix, 

. 370. 
3 ? It is worthy of note that a subsequent writer faults Rabanus 


because of this very comment. See Gerbert, Mon. Vet. Lit. 
Alem., Vol. II., p. 274, col. a. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 137 


Almighty God, command these things to be carried up by 
the hands of Thy holy Angel to Thine altar on high, in the 
sight of Thy divine Majesty. Humbly therefore we make 
request that our oblations offered upon this altar which 
can be seen, our heavenly Father may command to be 
carried up by the hand of His holy Angel to that high 
altar which is before His divine Majesty, which with our 
eyes we cannot see, because it is not material but spiritual. 
And just as we cannot fathom the divine Majesty of the 
Father, so neither ought we attempt to fathom those 
things which are in His sight, but rather to believe. That 
as many of us as shall, from this participation of the altar, 
receive the most sacred Body and Blood of Thy Son, may be 
filled with all heavenly benediction and grace. We ought 
indeed to pray to our heavenly Father, that all of us who, 
from participation of this very altar upon which we offer 
to God the Father in commemoration of His Son our Lord 
God Jesus Christ, take the Body and Blood of the aforesaid 
Son of God, may deserve to receive all heavenly benedic- 
tion through the same Christ our Lord." ! 

Let us bring our brief series of extracts to a close by 
quoting his paraphrase of the first part of the concluding 
doxology. 

“In this we pray that through Christ Thy only-begotten 
Son, by whom all good things have been created, sanc- 
tified, and quickened, do Thou bless these sacraments, 
and proffer them to us to be received as an inexhausti- 
ble source of healing." ? 

If we turn to the earliest Ordines Romani, we shall find 
that they presuppose the view of the Canon Missae which 
we have been outlining. Ordo Romanus I., drawn up 
about 770 A.p.,? tells us that after the Sanctus “the Pontiff 


! See Appendix, pp. 370-371. 2 Ibid., p. 371. 

3 Cf. Ordo Romanus Primus, with Introduction and Notes by E.G. 
Cuthbert F. Atchley, L.R.C.P., M.R.C.S., London, 1905, pp. 3-7. 
Mr. Atchley’s edition of Ordo Rom. I. ought to be read by every 


188 ΤΗΕ ΟΟΝΡΕΟΒΑΤΙΟΝ OF THE EUCHARIST 


rises alone and enters on the Canon. The bishops, how- 
ever, and the deacons, subdeacons, and presbyters remain 
in the presbytery, and bow themselves down. Now when 
he [the Pontiff] says, To us also Thy sinful servants, the sub- 
deacons rise, and when he says, By Whom all these things, 
O Lord, the archdeacon rises alone. When he says, By Him 
and with Him, the archdeacon lifts up the chalice with the 
offertory-veil passed through its handles, and, holding it, 
raises it towards the Pontiff. The Pontiff moreover touches 
the side of the chalice with the loaves saying, By Him, 
and with Him, as far as, For ever and ever. Amen." ! 
In other words, all the attendant ministers stand in 
their places with heads bowed down until after the 
Invocation (Supplices te) has been said by the Pope, for 
no one thought of imagining that the elements were to 
be considered as consecrated until that prayer had 
been said. Moreover, no elevation of the consecrated 
elements is even hinted at until the end of the Canon is 
reached? The Ordo of St. Amand (ο. 800 Α.9.), which 
was apparently prepared as a semi-official description of 
the Pope's stational mass for the information of some 
Church, most probably in Gaul, that wished to pattern 


one who wishes to get a correct idea of the Roman rite before the 
doctrinal innovations of the ninth century and the ceremonial in- 
novations of the twelfth and succeeding centuries had changed the 
rationale of the Canon M issae, as understood by those who used it, 
so as to bring the Roman Church into a position of difference from, 
and antagonism to, the Catholic doctrine and practice regarding 
the consecration of the Eucharist, and to her own earlier belief 
as well. See especially Part IL, δὲ XI., XIIL, and XVI. (pp. 
89-90, 96-99, 102-103). 

! See Appendix, p. 362. 

*Of. De Vert, Explication . . . des Cérémonies de V Eglise (in 
four volumes), Paris, 1720, 1710, 1713, 1713; Vol. III., pp. 305-306. 
Cf. Tracts on the Mass, edited by Dr. J. Wickham Legg (Henry 
Bradshaw Society, Vol. XXVII, 1904), pp. 241-243, 263-264. 

? See Atchley, op. eit., pp. 3-4. Cf. Duchesne, Christian Wor- 
ship, pp. 149-150. See Appendix, p. 364. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 139 


its ceremonial after that of the Roman Court, gives us 
the same picture as Ordo I. An adaptation of the Roman 
Ordo for the use of Besangon (tenth century) repeats 
the direetion of Ordo I. with scarcely a verbal difference. 
An adaptation of the Ordo Romanus for the use of Amiens 
(c. 1050 A.p.) is even more explieit, “ After the singing 
of the angelie hymn, the subdeacons stand behind the 
altar facing the bishop with face bowed down until the 
Body and Blood of the Lord be consecrated, and they 
hear, Nobis quoque peccatoribus" (To us also Thy sinful 
servants).? The celebrant, be he Pope, bishop, or humble 
presbyter, recited the Canon in so low a voice as to be 
inaudible to those standing near, and after the Invocation 
he raised his voice slightly so as to indicate that the _ 
consecration had been accomplished? 

Ordo Romanus II., a Gallican recension of Ordo I. made 
in the ninth century,“ adds a few words in reference to 
the signs of the cross which occur in different parts of 
the Canon. After the Sanctus with its Hosannas have 
been ended, we are told that 

“The Pontiff rises alone, and silently enters upon the 
Canon, and the deacons and subdeacons and presbyters 
all remain in the presbytery bowing themselves down. 
And in the Canon also six orders of crosses are observed, 
of which the first is, where it is said, That Thou wouldest 
accept and bless these gifts, these presents, these holy unde- 
filed sacrifices. The second, forsooth, is where it is said, 
And this oblation, we beseech Thee, O God, do Thou vouch- 
safe to make in all things blessed, approved, ratified. The 
third indeed is the order of cross where it is narrated, 
And taking bread into His holy and venerable hands, He 

1 British Museum MS. (Additional) 15,222. See Appendix, 
pp. 364-365. 

2 British Museum MS. (Additional) 17,004. See Appendix, 
p. 365. 


3 Cf. an early Ambrosian Ordo Missarum. See Appendix, p. 365. 
* See Atchley, op. cit., p. 8. 


140 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF ΤΗΕ EUCHARIST 


blessed it. Likewise, Giving thanks to Thee He blessed 
it. The fourth, where it is subjoined, A pure offering, 
a holy offering, a spotless offering, the holy bread of life 
eternal, and the cup of everlasting salvation. The fifth, 
where it is said, By Whom, O Lord, Thou dost always create, 
sanctify, quicken, bless, and bestow upon us all these good 
things. The sixth order follows, where it is uttered, By 
Him, and with Him, and in Him, when the chalice is 
touched with the oblate. . . . And the priest when he 
says, We humbly beseech Thee, with head inclined, bows 
himself before the altar. And when he says, speaking with 
audible voice, Tousalso, Thy sinful servants, the subdeacons 
rise, and stand in the place where they stood before, and 
look up into the face of the Pontiff. When he says By 
Whom all these things, O Lord, the archdeacon rises alone: 
and when he says By Him, and with Him, he lifts the chalice 
with the offertory-veil passed through the handles, and 
holds it lifting it up towards the Pontiff. The Pontiff 
then touches the chalice on its side, making two crosses 
with the oblates, and saying, By Him, and with Him, as 
far as, world without end." ! 

In reading this account it is obvious that the rehearsal 
of the original Institution is regarded, in distinction from 
the other parts of the Canon Missae, as a quotation, a 
narrative (ubi narratur), and the signs of the cross made 
therein at the recital of the words,“ He blessed," are con- 
sequently mimetic or illustrative of the benediction our 
Lord made upon the occasion when He instituted the 
Eucharist. In the other places where the sign of the cross 
is made in the Canon, it is the usual deictie act, whereby 
the oblations are pointed out and designated, either as 
the oblations mentioned by the celebrant as offered in 
memorial of Christ, or as the elements (ordained by 
Christ) upon which a blessing is impotrated, as the case 


! See Appendix, p. 363. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 141 


may be, according to the phraseology of each particular 
part of the Canon where the signs are made. We note 
also in this Ordo the low bow, upon the part of the cele- 
brant, at the beginning of the Invocation,' and the lifting 
up of the elements at the closing doxology, as in Ordo I. 

Amalarius (f 850 A.p.), who had before him an Ordo 
closely akin to the preceding, completes our knowledge 
of the ceremonial that was used in the ninth century in 
connection with the Canon Missae. In his Eclogues on 
the Office of the Mass? we learn, in addition to what we 
already know, that the celebrant bowed down at the words 
This oblation therefore (Hanc igitur) ; and also that near 
the opening of the Invocation (which he said bowing pro- 
foundly and remaining bowed until the words That as 
many oj us) the celebrant prayed privately at discretion.* 


‘Cf. Hoppe, op. eit., pp. 197-201. This is one of the few cere- 
monial acts that have a just title to the name Catholic. The cele- 
brant having commemorated the great work of Christ in our be- 
half, and having offered the elements in memorial thereof, bowed 
low as he began the Invocation, indicating his sense of unworthi- 
ness to approach and impetrate the acceptance and consecration 
of the elements by the Almighty Father. This act is still retained 
in the ceremonial of the Roman rite, though its true significance is 
ignored. It is very interesting to note that those who strive to 
pervert the meaning of the Invocation in our own Prayer of Con- 
secration after the pattern of the present official Roman under- 
standing of the Canon Missae, are careful to pass over this ancient 
gesture. 

? This lifting up of the elements at the close of the Canon was 
probably originally associated with the idea of the “translation of 
the elements to the heavenly altar" in the Supplices te. The para- 
graphs “ J” and“ K? of the Canon did not, in all probability, stand 
where they do now, and thus the doxology (paragraph ‘‘L”’) fol- 
lowed at once upon the close of the Supplices te. 

Cf. Frere-Procter, op. cit., pp. 447-448, especially note 2 on this 
last page; also Paleographie Musicale, Vol. V., pp. 77-83. 

$ See Appendix, pp. 372-373. 

* Cf. a direction, at the opening of Supplices te in a twelfth 
century Missal, for the priest to bow toward the altar and say three 
times, * God be merciful to me a sinner." See Appendix, p. 365. 


142 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


This would be most probably a petition for mercy in view 
of his own unworthiness to draw nigh and invoke the 
Divine blessing on the oblations of the Church. From 
his treatise Of Ecclesiastical Offices we also learn that the 
celebrant took the bread and the cup into his hands at 
those words of the Narrative which describe our Lord as 
doing so. This is again as plainly an illustrative or - 
dramatic act as the signing of the cross over the bread 
and cup respectively, in the same Narrative of Institution. 
It is significant that the Micrologus, a treatise written in 
the eleventh century by Bernold of Constance, shows us 
a ceremonial of the Canon Missae differing not at all from 
that of Amalarius in the points under consideration.? 

In the year 858 the bishops of the two archdioceses of 
Rouen and Reims, assembled at Quierci, in a long letter 
written to Louis of Germany, giving their reasons why 
they refuse an oath of vassalage to him, declare that 
* [t is abominable that the hand anointed with the sacred 
chrism, which out of bread, and wine mixed with water, 
through the prayer and the sign of the cross consecrates 
the sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, what- 
ever it may have done before ordination, should after 
ordination to the episcopate touch a secular oath in any- 
wise."? It is obvious that the consecration of the Eucha- 
rist was considered by these bishops as effected by the 
Church's prayer to that end, and that the oblations of bread 
and wine were marked out by the sign of the cross, in the 
course of that prayer, as the objects for which the hallowing 
wasasked. It is also abundantly evident that the theory 
that the mere recitation of our Lord's words of adminis- 
tration effected the consecration, had never even been 
heard of by them. 

Another most notable confirmation of the old tradition 


1 Book III., Chap. XXIV. See Appendix, p. 371. Cf. De Vert, 


op. cit., Vol. I., pp. 159-160, 249-250; Vol. III., p. 253. 
? See Appendix, pp. 374-375. ? See Appendix, p. 374. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 143 


in the interpretation of the Canon Missae is to be found 
in the pictures with which the limner illustrated the 
Canon in a Sacramentary of the tenth century ! once pre- 
served at the monastery of S. Blaise in the Black Forest. 
One of these represents the celebrant standing erect and 
making the signs of the cross in the preliminary Invoca- 
tion (Quam oblationem)? The second portrays the cele- 
brant bowing low for the Invocation proper (Supplices 
te). The third illustration is given to the Agnus Dei, 
before the priest's communion.! Thus this artist of the 
tenth century, in picking out those parts of the Canon 
Missae to illustrate, which were in his day considered of 
special importance, gives us a stronger proof of contem- 
porary belief than even verbal testimony could furnish? 


‘Cf. Delisle, Mémoire sur d'Anciens Sacramentaires, p. 192. 

2 Gerbert, Monumenta Veteris Liturgiae Alemannicae, typis San- 
Blasianis, 1777, Vol. I., p. 234. 

3 Ibid., p. 235. * Ibid., p. 237. 

* After the later theory of consecration by the recitation of our 
Lord's words in the Narrative of Institution had come in, we find 
the elevation of the host after Hoc est enim corpus meum chosen as 
the most important act to illustrate. The ancient understanding and 
importance of the Supplices te was still so strongly felt when this 
manuscript was written, that the limner, reflecting the belief of his 
time, all unconsciously has left behind a witness, not lightly to be 
gainsaid, of the fact that Rome was then at one with the rest of the 
Catholie Church in her Eucharistie Prayer. 

The study of the growth of the rubrics in the Canon Missae, 
especially in the Narrative of Institution, as witnessed by the 
MSS., affords strong corroborative testimony to this fact. 

If one will tak» th» trouble to ex mine the MSS. contained 
in any fair-sized collection, he will be well repaid. Not only the 
variety in the rubrics (if there are any), but also the details of the 
scribes’ work, show plainly the theological atmosphere in which 
they worked and prayed. The earlier Missals and Sacramentaries, 
knowing nothing of the notion of consecration by mere recitation 
of our Lord's words of declaration, do not exaggerate the size or 
decoration of these words. In this connection we may compare, 
e.g., a Gregorian Sacramentary, written at Como, Italy, in the 
eleventh century, and a Missal, written at Bergamo in the four- 


144 ΤΗΕ ΟΟΝΡΕΟΒΑΤΙΟΝ OF THE EUCHARIST 


Moreover, it is deeply significant that the seribe of this man- 
uscript, in writing in the rubries, which correspond almost 
exactly with those of the Eclogues of Amalarius, did not 
put in any indication of the picking up of the bread and 
cup and of the sign of the cross made over each separately 
in the Narrative of Institution,! which mimetie gestures 
we know to have been in use, from Amalarius's own testi- 
mony, in the ninth century.” The reason is not far to 
seek; the Narrative of Institution was but the prelude, 
and had no direct bearing as effecting, ipso facto, the 
consecration of the Eucharistie elements. 

The rationale and accompanying ceremonial of the 
Canon Missae at the period under consideration we find 
to be parallel with that of the other Liturgies of Christen- 
dom. The consecration of the Eucharist was regarded 


teenth century. In the first (Bodleian, MS. Lat. liturg. d. 4) the first 
word of Qui pridie is not given even a capital letter, the Narrative 
being merely a quotation in the paragraph that includes from Quam 
oblationem down to the Invocation, Supplices te. Rubrics added in 
the margin by a later hand, direct the simple picking up of the host 
and chalice in the Narrative of Institution, the profound inclination 
before the Invocation, and the raising of the voice after it. In 
the second, however (British Museum Add. MS., 15,120), we find 
the words of declaration, * Hoc est enim corpus meum," etc., in 
letters about two and a half times as large as the rest of the text 
of the Canon. In an English MS. of about the year 1188, that 
once belonged to a monk of the Benedictine abbey of St. Wer- 
burgh at Chester (Bodleian, MS. Tanner 169*, part 3), we note 
that the places emphasized by the scribe are the opening words of 
the Canon, Τε igitur, and the opening words of the Supplices te, 
marking out thus the all importance of the Invocation.  Ex- 
amples might be multiplied and the growth of rubrics fully shown, 
but space forbids. 

! [t is obvious that these mimetic acts had not yet assumed the 
importance in men's minds which they afterward did when per- 
verted. 

? See Appendix, p. 371. 

3 What is the rationale of all the Eastern Anaphore we have 
seen above in Chap. III., q.v. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 145 


as God’s act in reply to the prayer of His Church for the 
acceptance and hallowing of her oblations of bread and 
wine offered in commemoration of Christ’s sacrifice. 
The universal Church in celebrating the Eucharist elung 
closely to the analogy of her Master's Institution. After 
uttering hearty praises to Almighty God for all His loving- 
kindnesses in creation and redemption, the Charter of 
the holy rite is read, and as the celebrant rehearses the 
story of how Christ instituted His service of memorial, 
he illustrates the narrative with dramatic gestures, setting 
forth thus most eloguently before the Almighty Father 
the Warrant of His dear Son that emboldens His people 
to offer the Christian Sacrifice. Then obedient to her 
Master, the Church, by her representative, ever mindful 
of all that Christ has wrought for her, offers the antitvpi- 
cal oblations: and as the priest prays for the acceptance 
of the Church "s offering, he bows low, confessing his own 
unworthiness and seeking of God that He hallow the bread 
and wine, in answer to the Invocation or Epiklesis. We 
may confidently acquiesce in the words with which Dr. 
Hoppe epitomizes the results of his researches regarding 
the significance of the Supplices te of the Canon Missae. 
“ Therefore, if we sum up the foregoing inquiry, the entire 
agreement of the Roman Canon of Consecration with that 
of the Greek and Oriental Liturgies has been shown. 
'The aet of Consecration is there, as here, made complete 
liturgically by a “ solemnis oratio, by a great act of Prayer 
and Blessing, by the Invocation of the creative Power 
of God, by the Epiklesis of the Holy Ghost. The method 
of Consecration of the Roman Church differs neither in 
point of textual expression, nor in ceremonial, from that of 
the Eastern Churches." ! 


1 Die Epiklesis, ete., pp. 209-210. “Sonach hat sich, wenn 
wir die bisherige Untersuchung zusammenfassen, die ausnahms- 
lose Congruenz des rómischen Consecrationskanon mit jenem der 
griechischen und orientalischen- Liturgieen ergeben. Der Conse- 


146 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


The question next presents itself as to the time or occa- 
sion when the theory of Eucharistie consecration developed 
by the Schoolmen first took its rise. This would seem to 
be largely the outcome of the Paschasian controversy 
in the ninth century, wherein we find traces of confusion 
of thought evident in the writings of Paschasius himself, 
a confusion which later came to dominate the notions of 
Eucharistie consecration in the tenth and eleventh cen- 
turies, and was stereotyped both in dogma and cere- 
monial praxis in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. 
The materialistic theology of Paschasius and his followers 
triumphed over the older and more primitive belief of 
his opponents, and this carried along with it the new 
confusion of thought in regard to the consecration of 
the Eucharist, into a place of dominance throughout 
Western Christendom. The development of the doctrine 
of transubstantiation and of the notion that the Eucharist 
is consecrated by the recital of Christ's words of declara- 
tion or administration to His Apostles went on together? 
the latter influenced by the ignorance of the Fathers that 
prevailed and by the isolation of the two great divisions 
of Christendom from each other.’ 
crationsact ist dort, wie hier, liturgisch zu einer 'solemnis oratio,’ 
zu einem grossen Gebets- und Segensacte, zur Anrufung der schaf- 
fenden Gottesmacht, zur Epiklese des heiligen Geiste ausgewachsen. 
Der Consecrationsmodus der römischen Kirche differirt weder 
textlich, noch rituell von dem der morgenländischen Kirchen.” 

1 Of. Bishop Gore, Dissertations on Subjects connected with the 
Incarnation, New York, 1895, p. 264. “However much later 
scholastics may have refined the doctrine of transubstantiation, in 
its original form as held and pressed upon the ‘hereties’ it was of 
a plainly materialistic and superstitious character." 

2 This is not understood as generally as it should be. The East- 
ern Churches, however much they may have adopted in later times 
the equivalents of Latin Scholastie theological terms, have kept 
far closer to the earlier ages of the Church, not only in their belief 
and practice in the celebration of the Liturgy, but also in their con- 
cept of the Eucharistie Presence of Christ. 

3 Cf. Le Brun, Défense, etc., pp. 59 seq., especially pp. 59, 63, 89. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 147 


In looking into Paschasius’s treatise On the Body and 
Blood of the Lord, we find strong evidence of the hold of 
the old tradition of the Church upon him, alongside of 
the germs of the revolutionary theory that was to supplant 
it entirely, later on. 

Thus (in Chap. IV., 3) we read, “ Assuredly it is the 
true flesh of Christ, which was crucified and buried, truly 
it is the sacrament of that flesh, which by the priest is 
divinely consecrated upon the altar by Christ’s word 
(in verbo Christi) through the Holy Ghost; whence the 
Lord Himself proclaims: This is My Body." + This as 
it stands might be nothing more than an affırmation that 
it is by the command of Christ that the sacrament is con- 
secrated. But in view of what Paschasius says in Chap. 
XV., these words seem rather to indicate the beginning 
of that confusion of Institution and Observance which 
worked such havoc in the Liturgy of the West. 

In the eighth chapter, in speaking of the unworthy re- 
ceiver, Paschasius says:— 

“ Neither does he fear the presence of the divine Majesty, 
while he thinks there is nothing more than the things which 
are seen, nor does the wretched man realize that the flesh 
of Christ is never rightly received save from His hand and 
from the heavenly altar where Christ, ‘the High Priest of 
good things to come,’ intercedes for all. Whence the 
priest when he begins to dedicate these things, among 
other things says: Command that these things be carried 
up by the hand οἱ Thy holy Angel unto Thy heavenly altar 
in the sight of Thy divine Majesty. And do you think, O 
man, to receive that from any other place than from that 
altar where having been carried aloft it is consecrated?" ? 

“But perchance to this ‘blind reason’ says: ‘And how 
into heaven before the sight of the divine Majesty is it so 
suddenly presented, since here, be it called bread or flesh, 
it is all the time held visibly in the hand of the priest . . .?’ 


1See Appendix, p. 376. ? See Appendix, p. 377. 


| 


145 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Learn that God being Spirit is everywhere without limi- 
tation of place. Understand that being spiritual these 
things are neither locally nor carnally carried on high be- 
fore the sight of the divine Majesty. . . . Do you think 
there is any other altar where Christ the High Priest inter- 
cedes than His own Body by which and in which He offers 
to God the Father the vows of the faithful and the faith 
of the believing? And if that heavenly altar is believed 
truly to be the Body of Christ, you will not think that you 
receive the Flesh and Blood of Christ from any other place 
than from His very Body." ! 

It is surely patent to any reader of these passages that 
in spite of newer notions, Paschasius was restrained by 
the traditional view of the Canon Missae, which saw in 
the prayer Supplices te the Invocation proper of the Latin 
rite. 

Again in Chap. XII. he refers the consecration of the 
elements to the word of the Creator? and the power of.the 
Holy Spirit, and states that Christ here (as in baptism) 
acts through the Holy Spirit, to make the oblations His 
Body and Blood. He continues:— 

“For who else had been able to create in the womb that 
the Word might be madeflesh? — So also it is to be believed 
in this mystery, that by the same power of the Holy 
Spirit, through the word of Christ, His Flesh and Blood are 
made by an invisible working. Wherefore also the priest 


! See Appendix, p. 377. 

* This does not of itself mean more than was suggested by S. 
Paul's language to S. Timothy (1 Tim.iv. 4, 5), touching the sanc- 
tification of food generally, “by the word of God and prayer." 
This rationale was that accepted by the Fathers (see above, Chap. 
IL, p. 32, note 2) in the consecration of the Eucharist. The 
hallowing of the material elements appointed was considered to 
be grounded upon Christ's word of declaration (as once for all 
spoken by Him) and upon His command (as a living, perduring 
word), yet effected by the Holy Spirit in each celebration of the 
Liturgy in answer to the Church's prayer, or Invocation. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 149 


says: Command that these things be carried up unto Thy 
heavenly altar in the sight oj Thy divine Majesty: for what 
is his request that they be carried up thither, save that it 
may be understood that those things be done through 
His [Christ's] priesthood? For He was made a High Priest 
for ever after the order of Melchizedek, as the Apostle 
witnesses, to make intercession for us, presenting Himself 
before God the Father. . . . Moreover before it is made 
His Body by consecration, it is the oblation of the priest, 
as he acknowledges, or of the whole family that offer it: 
but by the word and by the power of the Holy Spirit it 
becomes a new creature in the Body of the Creator for our 
renewal and salvation. Wherefore, near the altar of 
the heavenly sacrifice He is proved, by the warrant of 
Scripture, always to stand, so that from His consecration 
we may receive His Body and Blood." ! 

Here as before we see the same persistent clinging to the 
Supplices te as the most important factor in the Canon 
Missae. In Chap. XV.,? however, we find the foundation 
of the theory which in the next two hundred years shifted 
the centre of gravity of the Canon Missae to the recitation 
of the Narrative of Institution. Starting from the con- 
cept that the Eucharist is consecrated through Christ's 
commands, he passes to the notion, without apparently 
realizing the transition, that Christ respeaks His words in 
the Qui pridie, and that all the rest of the Canon is, rel- 
atively, unimportant. In his eagerness to assert the 
absolute material identity of the gift which the communi- 
cant receives with that which Christ gave to His apostles, 
Paschasius tends to overlook those clear distinctions 
which had heretofore regulated the Church's Eucharistie 
observance. This chapter is indeed a most confused and 
illogical piece of work. At one time Paschasius bases the 
consecration of the Eucharist upon the command of our 
Lord, “Do this in remembrance of Me," and he seems 


! See Appendix, p. 378. 2 [bid., pp. 378-381. 


150 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


to have in mind the function of the celebrant as that of 
invoking God’s blessing. Again apparently it is the re- 
petition of Christ’s words of administration, “ This is My 
Body," “This is My Blood," which ipso facto effects the 
consecration. This confusion was in all probability due 
to the exigency of providing a basis for his exceedingly 
crude conception of what consecration meant. The physi- 
cal miracle demanded thereby, and the supposed creation 
of what Berengar, later on, justly described as a portiuncula 
carnis,! and the lack of a proper distinction between sacra- 
mentum and res sacramenti, involved necessarily the mis- 
application of our Lord’s words. The development of 
what afterward became the official doctrine of tran- 
substantiation, and the new notion as to the means of 
consecration, interacting one upon the other, wove the 
veil of mistaken and misleading ceremonial which has so 
long covered the face of the Canon Missae. Ratramn, who 
wrote in criticism of Paschasius, breathes a different 
atmosphere, going back to S. Isidore of Seville for his in- 
spiration, and holding fast to the old traditions of the 
undivided Church? But as our concern is primarily with 
matters liturgical rather than with doctrinal, we must not 
follow this question further at the present time. 

Florus (f:859 A.p.) in his treatise On the Exposition 
oj the Mass sets before us very plainly both the older view 
of the Canon Missae and the newer in juxtaposition and 
unreconciled, and in such a manner as shows that he is 
pleading for something novel, in the very way in which he 
treats the Narrative of Institution. From different parts 
of his comment on the Canon we will note a few words. Of 
the Canon he tells us that after the Preface and Sanctus, 
“The priest begins to pour forth the prayer by which the 
very mystery of the Lord's Body and Blood is con- 
secrated," ? a clear reminiscence of tradition. 


! Cf. Bishop Gore, op. cit., pp. 253-254. 
? See Appendix, pp. 375-376. 3 $42. Ibid., pp. 381-382. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 151 


In the course of his comment on Te igitur, he says, 

“ Wherefore does the priest say to God the Father, * We 
pray and beseech,' except for that which follows, namely, 
that those things which are offered to Him, the gifts, the 
presents, the holy sacrifices, He would hold acceptable, 
that is well pleasing, and would bless them? For it is the 
part of priests to offer and invoke the Divine Majesty; 
it is the part of God to vouchsafe to receive and to bless 
those things which are offered, just as in the Law He 
commanded the priests saying: “Thus shall ye bless the 
children of Israel, and shall say unto them,’ and after the 
words of benediction added: ‘ They shall invoke My name 
upon the children of Israel and I will bless them. What 
is plainer? “They shall invoke and I will bless,’ and yet 
He had said before, ‘Thus shall ye bless,’ but they by 
prayer, He by granting the blessing. So therefore also 
in the offering of the divine sacrifice the priests supply the 
ministry of offering and supplication; but God grants 
abundantly the gift of blessing through the One true 
Priest, by whom He both sanctifies the oblations, and 
having sanctified them accepts them. And so they say, 
T hat Thou wouldest accept and bless, as if they should hum- 
bly say: We beseech Thee to sanctify these things by Thy 
Spirit and bless them by Thy Mouth, so that what is done 
by our humble ministry may be fulfilled by the working of 
Thy Power." + 

On Quam oblationem he comments thus: — 

“The Almighty is prayed that, the oblation placed upon 
His holy altar and commended by such prayers, He will 
Himself by the power and descent of the Spirit make so valid 
and perfect à Eucharist, that it may in all respects be ap- 
proved. . . . That it may also be, by the operation and 
power of the same Holy Spirit, reasonable and in all these 
respects severally grateful and acceptable to God; so that, 
although taken from the simple fruits of the earth, by the 


1§ 43. See Appendix, p. 382. 


152 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ineffable power of the divine blessing it may be made the 
Body and Blood of the Only-begotten Son of God." ! 

So far we have had nothing out of harmony with the 
older tradition. Let us see what he has to say about the 
Narrative of Institution, Qui pridie. 

“In these words, without which no tongue, no country, 
no nation, that is, no part of the Catholic Church, can 
make, that is, consecrate the sacrament of the Body and 
Blood of the Lord, the Lord Himself delivered to the 
Apostles, and the Apostles generally to the whole Church, 
whereby the universal Church might celebrate the perpet- 
ual memorial of her Redeemer. Therefore by the power 
and words of Christ it is always consecrated and will be 
consecrated. His utterance it is which sanctifies the 
heavenly sacraments. He in His priests speaks daily. 
They fill an office, He operates by the might of His divine 
power. . . . Wherefore also the Church from tradition 
consecrating the mystery of the holy Body and Blood of 
the Lord by these words, deliberately says that the Lord 
said to the Apostles: ‘Take ye and eat yeall of this: for 
this is My Body. Likewise after supper, taking also this 
excellent cup.’ Let each faithful one take notice what it is 
that ‘this’ means, namely that the cup which the Catholie 
priest sacrifices, is none other than the very one the Lord 
delivered to His Apostles." ? 

Here, although we have emphatie stress laid upon our 
Lord's words as recited by the celebrant, yet at the same 
time we do not find the later and clearly defined teaching 
of Scholastic theology. Moreover, as we have seen, Florus 
can speak still of the “consecration of the mystical prayer,"? 
and in commenting upon Supplices te, as we shall see, give 
us something of the older tradition, despite his minimizing 


1§ 59. See Appendix, pp. 382-383. Cf. Rupert of Deutz, 
Appendix, p. 393. . 

28 60. See Appendix, p. 383. 

* Against Amalarius, I. 9. See Appendix, pp. 384-385. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 153 


treatment ofit. And from his day onward the Supplices te 
has remained a stumbling-block to the theory of conse- 
cration by the mere recitation of our Lord’s words. 

His comment upon Supplices te begins as follows: — 

“These words of the mystery are so profound, so won- 
derful, so amazing, who is able to comprehend them? 
Who can say anything fittingly? Rather are they to be 
reverenced and stood in awe of, than to be discussed. Yet 
blessed Gregory, a fit interpreter of so great a mystery, 
in a certain place says almost ineffably something about 
these words as of a thing ineffable. For who of the faith- 
ful, he says, can have a doubt that at the very time of the 
sacrifice, by the voice of the priest the heavens are opened, 
at that mystery of Jesus Christ the choirs of angels are 
present, that things lowly are taken into fellowship with 
things most high, things earthly are joined to things 
heavenly, and a union of things visible and invisible is 
brought about?" ! 

Do we not feel, as we listen to these words, as in the 
case of what Florus had to say about the Narrative of 
Institution, that the wish is father to the thought? The 
Qui pridie is to stand for something it has not hitherto, and 
henceforth the Supplices te 1s to be relegated to the realm 
of “ineffability”! At the same time in quoting S. Gregory 
he grants the original significance of the Invocation in à 
degree, as also in the later part of his comment upon it. 

“Therefore there takes place at this prayer and holy 
offering of the consecration something incomprehensible 
and ineffable, and much more wonderful than all these, 
that by angelie ministries and supplications as from off 
the heavenly altar in the sight of the divine Majesty they 
are offered at that time of offering, when Christ with His 
heavenly ministers around Him is believed to be present 
that He may consecrate the offered gifts.” ? 

From this time onward we shall continue to find traces 


. "866. See Appendix, pp. 383-384. 2 Ibid. See Appendix, p. 384. 


154 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


of the older tradition of consecration by prayer to God 
for that end, and of the Supplices te as the Invocation 
proper of the Canon Missae, for of old the elements were 
not regarded as consecrated nor as capable of being spoken 
of as the Body and Blood of Christ until that “time of 
offering, dedication, or consecration” (hora immolationis).! 

It is not necessary for us to attempt to look into all ? the 
writings on the Eucharist which followed the Paschasian 
controversy. The emphasis laid upon our Lord's word 
as repeated by the celebrant, as constituting the chief 
factor in effecting the consecration, did not diminish. 
At the same time the further development of this notion to 
the effect that the moment these words were rehearsed, 
ipso facto the elements were at once consecrated, was not 
at once made. The somewhat double-minded position of 
Florus, e.g., gave way later to that which ignored every- 
thing in the Canon except the recitation of “ This is My 
Body," “This is My Blood." But the Berengarian con- 
troversy was needed, and the overthrow of the older faith 
of the Church by a most materialistic doctrine of tran- 
substantiation,? in order to complete the theory of con- 
secration that to this day dominates the whole Roman 
Church. In the period of transition, we may note, for 
example, the dietum of ἃ Synod held at Arras in the year 
1025, which reads thus: — 

“And this sacrifice of bread and of wine mixed with 
water, by an ineffable sanctification, by the sign of the 
cross, and by His words is consecrated upon the altar; and 
when the saving memorial of His passion and resurrection, 
and also of His ascension into heaven is celebrated, it 15 

1 Cf. Paschasius Radbertus, De Corp. et Sang. Dom., VIII. 1; 
Appendix, p. 377. 

? Florus was much copied by others, as may be seen from the 
extracts from the Pseudo-Alcuin, Of Divine Offices, and Confession 
of Faith; and from Agobard, Against Amalarius; which will be 


found in the Appendix, pp. 385-386; 368. 
> Cf. Bishop Gore, op. cit., quoted above, p. 146, note 1. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 155 


made the true and proper Body of our Lord Jesus Christ 
Himself and His true and proper Blood, although it seems 
to be something else." ! 

In this we see plainly the coórdination of a new factor 
(“by His words") with the two factors mentioned by the 
bishops assembled at Quierei in 858 A.n.? 

In the controversy around Berengar of Tours it is not 
hard to see that Berengar and his opponents differed radi- 
cally in their notions of the consecration of the Eucharist, 
and that the condemnation of Berengar and of Ratramn 
(this last, by mistake, as John Scotus Erigena) gave the 
needed impetus to a theology built on ignorance of the 
fathers and of the Eastern Church, on bad philosophy, and 
on confused thought, which made possible the intro- 
duction of the elevation of the elements immediately after 
the words, “This is My Body," in the twelfth century, 
and to the further developments of ceremonial that were 
so soon to cut the Roman Church off from primitive and 
truly Catholie conceptions of the consecration and use of 
the Eucharist. 

The council that met at Rome in 1079 a.p. were for the 
most part of the opinion that the Eucharist was conse- 
erated “through the words of the sacred prayer and the 
consecration of the priest, by the unseen operation of the 
Holy Spirit." ? This modus of expression was entirely 
congruous with the old tradition of the Church, but the 
phrase exacted from Berengar ran thus: “I Berengar 
with my heart believe and with my mouth confess, that 
the bread and wine, which are placed upon the altar, 
through the mystery of the sacred prayer and the words 
of our Redeemer, are substantially changed into the true 
and proper and life-giving Flesh and Blood of Jesus 
Christ." * Now while this added phrase might mean no 
more in itself than that the words of Christ were a con- 


‘See Appendix, p. 387. 3. See Appendix, p. 387. 
? See above, p. 142. 4 Tbid., p. 387. 


156 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


tributing factor in the consecration, yet in the mind of 
Berengar’s opponents it meant clearly more than that. 
Thus Eusebius Bruno, Bishop of Angers (f 1088 4.n.), 
in a letter addressed to Berengar, after quoting the Narra- 
tive of Institution as it stands in the Canon Missae, says: 
“By the power and efficacy of His word, by which all 
things were made, the bread, after the sacring of the priest 
consecrating by these words, we believe and confess to be 
the true Body of Christ, and the wine, in like manner, to be 
His true Blood." ' Guitmund of Aversa uses the phrase 
“through the words of the Saviour,"? and Durandus 
of Troarn explains our Lord's command as follows: 
**Do this" What is the meaning of ‘Do this’? It 
is, * Make this Body, this Blood, by My words, by My 
invocation.’ 3 

When we read what Berengar himself wrote, as the 
mature opinion of his later years, in his treatise Of the 
Holy Supper,’ we realize not only that he held a positive 
and strong view of the Eucharistie Presence, but also (and 
with this we are more immediately concerned), that his 
view of the Canon Missae and of the rationale of its frame- 
work wasin accord with the older, and primitive, tradition 
of the Church. Not only does Berengar quote in full S. 
Augustine's description of the consecration of the Eu- 
charist contained in the Third Book of his treatise On the 
Trinity, which speaks of it as “ consecrated by the mystical 
prayer" and “sanctified by the unseen operation of the 
Spirit of God" ;? but his frequent reference to parts of the 
Canon Missae and his detailed comment upon it contain 
plain evidences that he was contending also for the ancient 
tradition of the Western Church (which others were leaving 
rapidly behind them), in regard to the hallowing of the 


! See Appendix, p. 388. ? Ibid., p. 388. 

3 Ibid., p. 388. 

4 De Sacra Coena, edited by A. F. and F. Th. Vischer, Berlin, 
1834. 5 Ibid., p. 268. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 157 


sacramental elements, and to the Supplices te as the In- 
vocation proper of the Latin Liturgy. Against the erude 
materialistic notions of his opponents, Berengar calls the 
Canon M issae as a witness! and points out repeatedly that 
while it is full of petitions to God to accept and bless the 
elements offered, yet there is no hint in it that they are to 
be changed by destruction of their substance into a 
portiuncula carnis, as the view of his attackers required.’ 
He proves this not only from the prayer as a whole, but 
also from a consideration of its several parts. It is “the 
prayer (of some length) poured forth by every priest ac- 
cording to the Roman use." ? Again and again he speaks 
of “the prayer," * “the priestly prayer," 5 “the priestly 
supplication." * The priest prays for the “advancement 
and the exaltation,” of the elements “to a higher con- 
dition,"" to “ greater efficiency and honour,"* and this 
through God's “acceptance and blessing." ? In his comment 
upon Unde et memores (with the commentary of Rabanus 
Maurus upon the same passage evidently before his mind), 
Berengar plainly states that in this (= The Oblation) there 
is offered bread, properly so called, and adds: “ Now this 
can be hallowed by the prayers of the priests." ' Again, 
in his comment upon the Supra quae he maintains that it 1s 
the Church’s memorial offering of bread and wine which 
is compared to the sacrifices of Abel, Abraham, and Mel- 
chizedek." In Supplices te the highest advancement" 


1 De Sacra Coena, pp. 277-282. Cf. Ibid., pp. 84-85, 133-134, 
231-235. 2 Ibid., pp. 277-282 passim. 

3 Ibid., p. 277. “Ab omni sacerdote oratio more Romano 
Domino sub silentio prolixior funditur." 

4 Ibid., p. 278, Oratio." 5 Ibid., p. 281, “ Prex sacerdotalis." 

5 Ibid., p. 279, “ Deprecatio sacerdotalis." 

7 [bid., p. 277, “ Provectio in melius et sublimatio." 

S [bid., p. 278, “ Ad majores effectus, ad majorem provexeris 
dignitatem." 

? Ibid., p. 279, “Per acceptationem et benedictionem Domini." 

19 See Appendix, p. 387. ! Op. cit., pp. 280-281. 


158 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 
or *exaltation," namely “to the heavenly altar of God," 
is requested for the bread and wine. In the light of the 
tradition of the undivided Church, and of his own words, 
Berengar, in spite of his weakness when hard pressed by his 
enemies, stands forth in his latest utterances as an isolated 
champion of earlier and more truly Catholic belief regard- 
ing the consecration of the Eucharist. The crude mate- 
rialism of the majority (who, as Berengar was fond of 
pointing out, are not by any means infallible)' prevailed 
in the Western Church, and marking out Christ's words of 
administration as the means and moment of consecration, 
exaggerated the simple mimetic act of picking up the 
bread and cup ? in the recital of Qui pridie by prolonging 
it and by raising the elements aloft, as an aet of protest 
against what this materialism called the heresy (1) of 
Berengar? The twelfth century saw the spread of this 
notion. Forgetting that these words were rehearsed in an 
historical narrative, to show the warrant for the Church’s 
obedient observance in the paragraphs that follow, in the 
Canon Missae, and forgetting that the Church had always 
applied Christ’s words of declaration and administration in 
her own delivery of the consecrated elements, when she 
said to each communicant, “This is the Body of Christ," 
“This is the Blood of Christ,” and stupidly alleging that 
Christ was speaking His own words through the celebrant, 
in contradiction even to the plain grammatical construc- 
tion of the Canon Missae (as of all other liturgies), each 


1 De Sacra Coena, pp. 27, 34, 39, 44-45, 54-55, 58. 

? Cf. De Vert, op. eit., Vol. L, pp. 250; Vol. III., pp. 261-264; 
especially Vol. IV., pp. 186-195, 199-208, 209-217, 220. 

3 There has been, of late, entirely too much repetition of the 
phrase, * the heresy of Berengar," upon the part of those who would 
fain produce the impression that the doctrine of the Real Presence 
and that of Transubstantiation are synonymous, and who therefore 
strive to bring in all the late Roman ceremonial of Qu? pridie under 
the pretext that by so doing they are only safeguarding the doc- 
trine of the Real Presence. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 159 


element was lifted up while the words of Christ were re- 
peated, and a definite moment of transubstantiation was 
asserted. With the theological diffieulties and subtleties 
that soon rose in the wake of this innovation, we are not 
here concerned. It is merely of interest to our present 
inquiry to trace the further developments of ceremonial 
that followed the introduction of this new elevation, until 
the present ceremonial praxis accompanying the recital 
of Qui pridie was reached. Before doing this, however, it 
may be interesting to note one or two evidences of the 
hold that the old understanding of the Supplices te had 
upon men's minds even after the newer ideas were well 
established. For example, Alger of Liege (f c. 1131 a.p.) 
in his Of the Sacraments oj the Body and Blood of the Lord, 
Book I., Chap. XIV., writes: — 

“Wherefore also the priest as Christ's minister conse- 
erating the Lord's Body upon the earthly altar, and yet 
not assigning anything to his own merits, but all to the 
power and grace of God, prays in the Canon to God the 
Father saying, * Command that these oblations be carried 
to Thee by the hands and power of Thy Son, Thy Angel, 
who is the Angel of Great Counsel, not to this lowly and 
visible altar, where now it is, but to Thy altar on high, that 
is Thy Son, whom Thou hast exalted to Thy right hand, 
in the sight of Thy majesty, that it may become to us the 
Body and Blood of Thy most dearly beloved Son :' showing . 
that the Son Himself, by the command of the Father, is in 
heaven offering, and is both the sacrifice and that upon 
which it is offered." ! 

Again, Peter Lombard (f 1164 a.p.) says on the one 
hand: — 

“The form indeed is that which He gave saying, ‘This 
is My Body, and afterward, ‘This is My Blood. For 
when these words are uttered the conversion of the bread 
and wine into the substance of the Body and Blood of 


‘See Appendix, pp. 392-393. 


160 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Christ takes place. The rest [of the Canon] is said for the 
praise of God." ! 

On the other hand, when discussing whether hereties 
can consecrate the sacrament, he decides negatively, 
saying : — 

“And Augustine [2] also seems to lay this down, saying: 
Consider the name and note the truth. For it is called 
missa in that the heavenly messenger comes to consecrate 
the life-giving Body, according to the utterance of the 
priest saying: Almighty God, command that these things 
be carried up by the hands of Thy holy Angel to Thy heavenly 
altar, ete. Therefore unless the Angel come, by no means 
can it be called missa. For if a heretic dared to undertake 
this mystery, would God send His Angel from heaven to 
consecrate his oblation?" ? 

Even Durandus (| 1296 A.p.), although he does not 
accept this interpretation following, says of the Sup- 
pluces le: — 

“In a second manner also the words aforesaid can be 
expounded, thus: Almighty God, command that these 
things, that 15 the bread and wine, understood, be trans- 
lated, that is transmuted, to Thy heavenly altar, that is into 
the Body and Blood of Thy Son, above the choirs of angels 
to be exalted, because the Lord’s Body is called an altar 
according to that saying: “ An altar of earth shall ye make 
Me. Bythe hand of Thy holy Angel, that is by the ministry 
of the priest." ? 

The very fact that Durandus thought it worth while to 
mention this understanding of the Supplices te, if only in 
order to reject it, shows how deep-seated was the tra- 
dition that the Supplices te was the Invocation proper of 
the Roman rite, and the equivalent of the Epiklesis of 
all other liturgies. 

If we retrace our steps for a moment, we find in the 


‘See Appendix, p. 393. ? Ibid., p. 393. 
_ 4 Ibid., p. 394. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 161 


Roman rite of the eighth and ninth centuries, among the 
ceremonial acts by which the Canon Missae was accom- 
panied, in the course of the recital of Qui pridie a picking 
up of the bread and of the cup at the words in that narra- 
tive, “ He took bread," * He took the cup," and also the 
sign of the cross made over each separately as the words 
“ He blessed it" were repeated of our Lord s acts in respect 
of each element at the first Eucharist. These acts illus- 
trated the reading over of the warrant given by Christ to 
His Church to keep His memorial, which charter is appro- 
priately quoted as the prelude to our obedient observance. 
Moreover this simple ceremonial continued without al- 
teration until the close of the eleventh century. For the 
notion of consecration as effected primarily by the reci- 
tation of Christ’s words of declaration to His disciples 
spread slowly and, of course, affected the traditional cere- 
monial of the Church only after getting a foothold strong 
enough to do so. The Micrologus shows us the same old- 
fashioned way of celebrating the Eucharist as obtained 
hitherto. We should note also that these same mimetic 
gestures during the recitation of the Narrative of Insti- 
tution are to be found in Eastern Liturgies as well.? 

Let us then note the steps of the change wrought by the 
new doctrine of consecration in post-Berengarian times. 
Bruno of Segni (f 1123 A.p.) states the new teaching as 
clearly as need be, as the starting-point for our further 
inquiry. 

““ He spake and they were made, He commanded and 
they were created. So therefore also now when He said: 
‘This is My Body’; and ‘This is My Blood’; so great was 
the potency of His word, that instantly both the bread was 
changed into His Flesh, and the wine into His Blood." ? 


‘See Appendix, pp. 374-375. 

? See, e.g., Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Vol. I., 
pp. 51-52, 176-177, 232. 

3 See Appendix, p. 389. 


162 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


“ Behold, the priest forever after the order of Melchize- 
dek by His ineffable power converts the bread and wine 
into the substance of His Body and Blood." ! 

“ He spoke then for Himself: He speaks now through 
His ministers; “This is My Body.’ And so great is the 
power and efficiency of His word, that forthwith what is 
said is done. Likewise moreover when He says: “This 
is My Blood,’ thereupon the wine is converted into His 
Blood." ? 

Compare with this the dietum of Odo of Cambray 
(f 1113 A.p.) as another example of the same reasoning 
(or lack of it). 

“Take away the words of Christ, the sacraments of Christ 
are not made. Do you wish the Body and Blood of Christ 
to be made, apply the utterance of Christ. The utterance of 
the Truth does what He says: for' Hespake and they were 
made, He commanded and they were created. Without 
doubt there is done in the creature what Christ's utterance 
says of the creature. For almighty is Thy utterance, O 
Creator. "Therefore by the utterance of Christ His Body 
and His Blood are made." ? 

Honorius of Autun (| 1120 A.p.) states this same notion 
without intimating that there has been any change in the 
ceremonial, as yet. 

“We take the bread into our hand, and we bless it 
(1.6. sign it with the cross), and we denote the time of 
grace when Simeon took Christ, Who was born the Living 
Bread, into his hands and rejoiced and blessed. Then we 
pick up the cup, and bless, and we express the time of the 
supper, when Christ pieked up the bread and cup in His 
hands, and blessed, and then delivered His Body and 
Blood to His apostles. Wherefore now first when the 
words of the Lord are recited in their order, the bread and 
wine are changed into the Body and Blood of the Lord." * 


! See Appendix, p. 389. 3 Ibid,, pp. 388-389. 
? Ibid., p. 389. * Ibid., pp. 389-390. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 163 


The next step in the development of the later ceremonial 
is to be found in the continuance of the act of “ picking up," 
each element being held aloft until after the utterance of 
Christ's words, “This is My Body," “This is My Blood," 
in either case. Hildebert of Tours ( 1133 A.D.) gives us 
a clear description of this stage of the ceremonial. 

“This is conferred entirely in those words which the 
priest subjoins, not his own, but those of the Lord. For 
he is about to recite what He pronounced, or did, when 
taking supper, He, the same, became a blessed supper 
Himself. 

Who the day before He suffered, took bread. 
Bread, as yet common, at this word is taken from the 
altar, and [the priest] having taken it, holds it with both 
hands. "Thereafter the presbyter when he comes to ' He 
blessed it,' imprints upon what he holds the mystical sign 
of the eross. Nor does he put it down upon the table, 
before, repeating Thy words, O Christ, he utters them 
over it. 
Take and eat ye all of this. 

Then he lifts the chalice and signs it, nor does he replace 
it, before he reiterates over it the words of the Institutor, 
thus: ‘Take and drink ye all of it,’ as far as, ‘unto remis- 
sion of sins. And if in this we may trust the fathers, 
while life eternal lasts, that is made food of the soul, 
which until now was food of the flesh. That by these 
words, both aequire new powers and greater than their 
own, approved writings teach. Under the cross, under the 
word, their nature is made new, and the bread honours 
the altar with Flesh and the cup with Blood. And so the 
presbyter, when he comes to those words whereby so great 
grace is granted to the altar, lifts up each, marking that it 
is higher than common foods, and that it carries with it 
something greater." ! 


. See Appendix, p. 390. Cf. Sicard of Cremona, Appendix, 
p. 394. 


164 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Similarly, Stephen of Autun (T 1139 a.p.) tells us: — 

“And this which the priest prays for, namely that the 
oblation of bread and wine may become the Body and 
Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, was first done when the 
disciples were at supper, in these words pronounced by 
Christ: ‘This is My Body,’ “This is the cup of My Blood of 
the New and eternal Covenant.’ But before the priest pro- 
nounces these words, he continues the seguel to those that 
precede, saying: ‘Who the day before He suffered took 
bread into His holy and venerable hands, and with eyes lifted 
up to heaven, to Thee, O God, His Father Almighty, giving 
thanks to Thee,’ ete. While he pronounces these words 
he takes the bread from the altar, and while it is lifted 
up he blesses it by making the sign of the cross, and after- 
wards, having duly recited and having repeated the words 
of the Lord, he puts it down upon the corporal. Then he 
lifts the eup, and signing it, repeats the words of the Lord, 
saying: ‘He blessed it, He gave it to His disciples saying: 
Take and drink ye all of this, This is the cup of My Blood,’ 
etc. O extraordinary miracle! O wonderful and most 
divine sacrament! What mind is not awed? What 
understanding does not fail? All perception is too dull, 
all reason vanishes. Let the prying of logic keep far 
away. Faith alone proves and knows this, that the food 
of men is become angels’ food. What the priest lifts up, 
he does not put down. That which is taken up and that 
which is put down seem to be the same in kind, colour, and 
taste: nevertheless it appears one thing, and another 
within lies hid. Common bread is picked up from off the 
altar, the immortal Flesh of Christ is put down. What was 
animal food has been made spiritual food. What was the 
temporary refreshment of men, has been made the eternal 
and unfailing satisfaction of angels." ἢ 

A treatise ascribed to Hugo of S. Victor (T 1141 a.p.) 
follows the phraseology of that of Hildebert of Tours 


‘See Appendix, p. 391. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 165 


quoted above, yet as it adds one slight touch, it will be 
cited here. 

“And this is entirely bestowed in those words of the Lord 
that were pronounced at His supper, which the priest sub- 
joins. But about to say these he thus first begins: * Who the 
day before he suffered.’ At these words he takes the bread, 
as yet common, from off the altar, and holding it up blesses 
and prints upon it the sign of the cross, and before he puts 
it down, he repeats the words of the Lord while he says: 
‘He blessed it and brake it, and what follows. After- 
wards he lifts the cup and signs it, and repeats the words of 
the Lord, saying: “ And He gave it to His disciples saying: 
Take and drink ye all of this.” Here takes place an ex- 
traordinary miracle. At these words food of the flesh be- 
comes food of the soul. By these words and by the sign 
of the eross nature is made new, and bread becomes Flesh 
and wine becomes Blood. Wherefore rightly when he 
comes to these words by which so great grace is given, the 
priest lifts each aloft, marking out this food and this drink - 
to be of more excellence than other." ! 

Here we appear to have a slight addition to the cere- 
monial, which may be inferred from the words of Hildebert 
of Tours, but which he does not explicitly state: namely, 
that after having picked up either element and having 
signed it while he held it, in addition to keeping hold of it 
until after the repetition of our Lord’s words, the celebrant 
raised each element higher still as he said the words refer- 
ring to each. This marks the transition to the next stage 
of the ceremonial development, when a further distinction 
was made by differentiating between the picking up of the 
bread and cup where it is said, * Hetook bread," “ He took 
the cup," and the lifting of them up quite high after the 
words, “This is My Body," and “This is My Blood," re- 
spectively had been said. 


‘See Appendix, pp. 391-392. 


166 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


When we come to the ancient Statutes of the Carthu- 
sians (ο. 1150 A.D.), we find ourselves in an atmosphere 
quite different from that of the time of the earliest Roman 
Ordines and Amalarius. The new notion of consecration 
by the mere repetition of our Lord’s words has taken com- 
plete possession of the ceremonial of the Canon Missae, so 
that men have come to regard the rest of the Canon as 
a mere setting to the (supposed) consecration wrought in 
the course of the recitation of a few words in one paragraph 
of it alone. A physical miracle is now believed to be 
performed by the priest saying: Hoc est enim corpus 
meum, Hic est calix sanguinis mei, etc. Hence a bell is 
to be rung after these words have been said, to call the 
congregation to a special worship not possible till that 
moment. 

" Having said the preface, the priest bows before the 
altar, and says, Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, ete., Te igitur, 
etc., as far as benedicas. "Then he rises, and makes the 
crosses as they are arranged in the missal. At Qui pridie 
quam pateretur, when he says: Accepit panem, he takes the 
host in both hands, lifts it a little, and blesses it in its place. 
If there are more hosts, as he says: Benedixit, with one 
sign he signs both the one he holds and the other also. 
Having said Hoc est corpus meum, the host is elevated so 
that it can be seen, and the bell is rung one stroke, or 
more in purely conventual masses. Now at the elevation 
of the host we prostrate ourselves to the ground, if we are 
praying standing, as when Et homo jactus est 1s said, nor 
do we rise until the cup is put down . . . At Simili modo 
when it is said Accipiens et hunc praeclarum calicem, he 
takes the cup with both hands, he lifts it a little, having 
first drawn back the corporals somewhat and holding them 
back between his fingers and the rim of the cup, lest they 
fall. Having said gratias agens, he puts it down, but does 
not remove his left hand. Having made the cross at 
benedixit, he takes hold again of the cup with both hands, 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 167 


and lifts it up a little, and holds it elevated as far as Unde 
et memores Domine." ! 

It is noteworthy that as γεί the chalice is not treated 
with guite the same regard. That is again a later devel- 
opment. For the present we may note some traces of the 
promulgation of the pattern set by the Carthusians, 
throughout the rest of Western Christendom.’ 

Among the directions given by the Synod of Paris 
(1197 a.p.), under Odo, is this: — 

“It is commanded to presbyters, that when they have 
begun Qui pridie in the Canon Missae, holding the host, 
they do not elevate it too high at once, so that it can be 
seen by all the people, but hold it about opposite their 
breast, until they have said: ‘This is My Body :" and that 
then they elevate it so that it can be seen by all." ? 

Here we see that it is found necessary to regulate the 
previous elevation, which was in origin a prolonging of the 
mimetic act of picking up the bread and cup. The vague 
attempt at emphasis upon the words, “ This is My Body,” 
and “ This is My Blood," in the interests of a crude Ca- 
pharnaite view of the Eucharistie Presence in opposition to 
Berengar, has been refined upon, and therefore, the ediet 
must go forth to time the elevation exactly in accordance 
with the development of doctrine. What an utter novelty 
the whole thing is, is entirely obvious from the provisions 
of synods in this (thirteenth) century that the people be 
taught to bow or kneel at the elevation of the host. For 
if there had been a single shred of genuine tradition for 


‘See Appendix, p. 395. 

? At the same time we should note that although the Carthu- 
sians led in the introduction of the new ceremonial of the elevation 
of the host in the twelfth century, yet the later developments of 
ceremonial (during Qui pridie) have not been adopted com- 
pletely by them. Their rite to-day is conservative in com- 
parison with the ceremonial stereotyped and made authoritative 
for the Roman Church at large by the Pian Missal of 1570 Α.Ρ. 

? See Appendix, pp. 395-396. 


168 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


either the innovation of a new idea of consecration, or 
for the attendant ceremonies that grew around it, it stands 
to reason that a series of enactments couched in almost 
the same words would not have been required in widely 
separated parts of European Christendom. If it had been 
the custom of the Church to ring a bell at the time the 
priest said “ This is My Body,” and if the faithful had always 
believed the bread to be consecrated by that recital, why 
all this setting forth of directions now for this diocese, or 
province, now for that? 

Thus we find among the Additions of William of Paris to 
the Constitutions of Gallo (1208 A.D.) :— . 

“It is commanded, that in the celebration of masses, 
when the Body of Christ is elevated, at the very elevation, 
or a little before, a bell be rung, as was otherwise ordered ; 
so that thus the minds of the faithful might be stirred up 
to prayer." ! 

Again, the Constitutions of Richard Poore, Bishop of 
Salisbury (c. 1217 a.p.), direct that: — 

“The laity be admonished, that they behave themselves 
reverently at the consecration of the Eucharist, and kneel: 
especially at the time when after the elevation of the 
Eucharist, the sacred host is put down." 3 

Again Pope Honorius writes to the prelates of Ireland 
(1219 a.p.) to this effect : — 

“Let each priest frequently teach his people, that when 
in the celebration of masses the saving host is elevated, 
each reverently bow, doing the same when the presbyter 
carries it to the sick.” ? 

In the Statutes issued by Stephen Langton (Archbishop 
of Canterbury) at the Council of Oxford, 1222 a.p., we read: 

“ Let the laity be admonished freguently, that wherever 
they see the Body of the Lord carried, at once they kneel 
as to their Creator and Redeemer, and with joined hands 


! See Appendix, p. 396. 2 Ibid., Ὁ. 396. 
3 Ibid., p. 396. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 169 


pray humbly until it has passed, and that this be done es- 
pecially in the time of consecration at the elevation of the 
host, when the bread is transformed into Christ’s true 
Body, and that which is in the cup into His Blood by the 
mystical benediction.” ! 

At a Provincial Council of the Scottish Church, 1225 
Α.Ρ., it is ordered :— 

“Let them not moreover elevate the host before these 
words are pronounced: ‘This is My Body"? 

At a Provincial Council of Tréves, 1227 a.p., it is pro- 
vided : — 

*" Likewise let the host not be elevated for the people 
before the words of transubstantiation." 3 

Among the Precepts of the Synod of Rouen, 1235 Α.Ρ., 
we find :— 

“It is commanded to presbyters, that when they have 
begun Qui pridie in the Canon Missae holding the host, they 
do not elevate it: but keep it opposite their breast, until 
they have said: ‘This is My Body.’ And then let them 
reverently and carefully elevate it, so that it can be 
Seen." * 

At the Synod of Worcester, 1240 Α.Ρ., we find Walter of 
Cantilupe ordering the ringing of a bell at the elevation 
by those monastic bodies who had not hitherto done so. 

“When moreover in the celebration of mass the Body 
of the Lord is raised on high by the hands of the priests, 
let a bell be rung; so that by this the devotion of the slug- 
gish be roused, and the love of others be the more strongly 
inflamed. And we command this moreover to be observed 
as to the elevation,by those religious who have not thus far 
kept this statute, so that it can be seen by those present." ® 

The Synodical Statutes of Walter and Simon, Bishops of 
Norwich, 1257 Α.Ρ., order:— 


" See Appendix, pp. 396-397. 4 Ibid., p. 397. 
2 Ibid., p. 397. > Ibid., p. 398. 
8 Ibid., p. 397. 


170 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


“ Moreover let each priest freguently teach his people, 
that when in the celebration of masses the saving host is 
elevated, they reverently bow." ? 

In 1261 a.p. the Provincial Council of Mayence gives 
order: — 

* Moreover let each priest diligently teach his people, 
that when in the celebration of masses the saving host is 
elevated, each one devoutly kneel, or at least reverently 
bow, doing the same when the presbyter carries it to the 
Sick" ? 

In 1268 a.p. the Synod of Clermont provides:— 

“ And let not presbyters when they begin Qui pridie in 
the Canon Missae elevate the host, but hold it carefully 
opposite their breast, until they have said, ‘For this is My 
Body ’: and then let them elevate it, and let them keep 
it elevated so long that it can be duly seen: and then let 
the bell be rung. Now this is laid down, lest mere bread 
be adored: which might happen, if it should be elevated 
before the utterance of those words." ? 

The Council of Munster in Westphalia, 1279 a.p., 
deerees:— 

“ Likewise let no priest elevate the host to show it to 
the people, except after he has said these words, ' For this 
is My Body’: and let the bell be rung three times, so that 
the faithful who hear, wherever they may be, may wor- 
ship.’ ° 

The Synod of Cologne, 1280 4.p., repeats this direction 
practically verbatim ;? and in 1287 a.p. the Synod of Exeter 
ordains, in words which will appropriately close our cita- 
tions in illustration of the gradual promulgation of the 
new doctrine of consecration as it crystallized and the new 
ceremony of elevation and adoration immmediately after 
the utterance by the priest of the words, * This is My 
Body," which it developed in its train: — 

! See Appendix, p. 398. * Ibid., p. 399. 


2 Ibid., p. 398. 5 Ibid., p. 399. 
8 Ibid., pp. 398-399. 


THE ROMAN CANON MISSAE 171 


“Moreover because by these words, ‘For this is My 
Body,’ and not by any others, the bread is transubstan- 
tiated into the Body of Christ: let the priest not elevate 
the host, until he has fully pronounced those very words, 
lest for the Creator, a creature be worshipped by the people. 

“ Moreover let the host be so elevated aloft, that it may 
be gazed upon by the faithful standing around; for by this 
the devotion of the faithful is roused, and faith receives 
a merited inerease. Let parishioners be anxiously ex- 
horted, that at the elevation of the Body of Christ, they 
not merely reverently bow, but kneel, and worship their 
Creator, with all devotion and reverence, to which by the 
stroke of a bell let them be roused at first: and at the 
elevation let a larger bell be struck three times." ! 

We have now to consider the next development in the 
overthrow of the old tradition of the Western Church. It 
is obvious, if the people are ordered to worship the 
host as supposed to be consecrated after the recitation of 
the words, “ This is My Body," and if a bell is to be rung 
to call them to this new duty, that sooner or later the 
priest himself would be affected by this new condition 
of things and begin to do what he was commanded to 
teach the people to do. We are not then surprised to find 
in Ordo Romanus X IV., written by Cardinal James Cajetan 
during the pontificate of Clement VI. (1342-1352 a.p.), a 
direction for the celebrant to worship by bowing his head 
after the recitation of “ This is My Body," and “ This is My 
Blood" respectively.? The ceremonial prescribed for Qui 
Pridie 15 as follows:— 

“Then saying Qui pridie, etc., let him wipe the thumb 
and index finger of each hand lightly upon the corporal, 
and let him take the host with his fingers; neither let 
him lift it much above the altar: in saying moreover 
elevatis oculis in caelum, let him lift his eyes: and in saying 


! See Appendix, p. 400. ? Ibid., pp. 400-403. 


172 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


benedixit, let him make the sign of the cross with his right 
hand over the host, which he holds with his left hand: and 
this done, let him again hold the host with the fingers of 
both hands, and pronounce clearly and devoutly the words 
of consecration: and these said, let him first worship 
with bowed head the sacred divine Body: then rever- 
ently and carefully let him elevate it on high to be wor- 
shipped by the people, and after it has been worshipped 
let him put it down in its place. . . . Having put down 
the host, as was said, in saying Simili modo, etc., let him 
take the cup uncovered, as before, let him hold it with both 
hands slightly elevated above the altar, and when he says, 
benedixit, having put down the cup upon the altar, let 
him make the sign of the cross over the cup with his right 
hand, as he holds it with his left, and this done, taking 
it again with both hands, and elevating it a little from the 
altar, let him proceed with the words of consecration as far 
as that place, remissionem peccatorum. And these finished, 
with head a little bowed let him worship the sacred Blood 
of the Lord, and let him elevate it to be worshipped by the 
people, as was laid down above concerning the Body. 
Neither is it necessary that he hold either the Body or the 
Blood elevated a long time; but after a short interval let 
him put it down, nevertheless so that he make the eleva- 
tions and replacings with due reverence and deliberation. 
Moreover as he is putting down the cup let him say these 
words: Haec quotiescumque, ete. And having put down 
the cup, and having set it in its place, with his hands raised 
as before, let him proceed with Unde et memores, ete." ! 
This continued for over two hundred years to be the 
authorized ceremonial of the Roman rite. But a further 
development took place, and was stereotyped for the 
churches of the Roman obedience in the Missal of Pius V. 
1570 a.v. Not satisfied with bowing his head after 


! See Appendix, pp. 401-402. 2 Ibid., pp. 410-411. 


ΤΗΕ ROMAN CANON MISSAE 173 


each supposed consecration, the celebrant took to bending 
his knees, instead of, or along with, the bow. This was in 
fact a sort of crouching down into practically a kneeling 
posture. Thus a kneeling down of short duration, a genu- 
flection! as it is called, came to be substituted for the bow, 
and by the end of the fifteenth century was probably 
customary in many places, yet without explicit sanction. 
In the text of the Exposition de la Messe of Jean de Vignay, 
reproduced by the Alcuin Club from a manuscript of the 
last part of the fifteenth century (c. 1480 a.p.),? we have 
a description of the ceremonial of the mass following 
closely the Roman rite of the time of de Vignay (t.e. the 
first half of the fourteenth century). The pictures with 
which the illuminator has illustrated the treatise, however, 
show us the celebrant crouching down, in the later fashion 
which must have been as familiar to him as it was un- 
known to Jean de Vignay or to Cardinal Cajetan when he 
framed Ordo Romanus XIV. This new gesture was re- 
commended by John Burckard in his Ordo Missae, in 1502? 

! No impartial observer can be convinced for long that there is 
really more reverence expressed by the quick sinking upon one 
knee only to rise at once, than by the bowing of the head and body. 
On the contrary, the rapid genuflection seems rather like a 
mockery, than like an act of profound worship, and the more it 
is multiplied (as in the modern Roman rite), the less does it seem 
to be inspired by the spirit of true devotion. 

? Alcuin Club Collections, II., Exposition de la Messe from La 
Legende Doree of Jean de Vignay. Edited by W. H. Frere, Lon- 
don, 1899. See especially pp. 12-13; and Plates 7, 8, 9 (opp. p. 
34). 

3 See Appendix, pp. 406-407. Cf. the ceremonial prescribedin the 
Indutus Planeta (see Appendix, p. 408), a series of directions con- 
tained in many editions of the Roman Missal (chiefly printed in 
France) between 1507 and 1546. This last does not go beyond 
Ordo Romanus XIV. (q.v). Even the Directorium Divinorum 
Officiorum of Ludovicus Ciconiolanus, published at Rome with 
the approval of Pope Paul III. in 1539, recommends the genuflec- 
tion in a way that shows it to have been anything but a universal 
gesture at that time. (See Appendix, pp. 408-409.) An interesting 


174 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


to be made both before and after each elevation in Qui 
pridie, and since the publication of the Pian Missal men- 
tioned above, this has become obligatory upon the clergy 
of the Roman obedience. In England the bow or incli- 
nation of the head was all that was authorized ? up to the 
time of the Reformation, although it is evident that in 
Cranmer’s time the genuflection was in use as an exag- 
geration of the lawful ceremonial? The elevation of the 
bread and cup was abolished in the Prayer Book of 15494 
this abolition carrying with it logically all the ceremonies 
that had followed in its wake. Moreover (as we shall see 
in the next chapter) the appeal of the English Reformation 
to the early and undivided Church was made good at last, 
in the revision of the Prayer Book for the American 
Church in 1789, by a return to the Eastern, and truly 
Catholic, teaching and practice in regard to the consecra- 
tion of the Eucharist (which had once been the use of 
Western Christendom as well), thus precluding forever 
any honest reintroduction of the mistaken Roman theory 
and ceremonial. 


trace of the progress of the new gesture is seen in the rubric at the 
close of Qui pridie in an edition of the Roman Missal published at 
Paris in 1555. (See Appendix, pp. 409-410.) 

! With the exception of a few privileged religious orders. 

? See Appendix, p. 412. 

* Note especially Thomas Becon, The Displaying οἱ the Popish 
Mass (Parker Society, 1844), pp. 260, 270, 275, 276, 283; cf. also 
A Comparison between the Lord's Supper and the Pope's Mass, pp. 
359, 385. 

*See above, p. 2. The gestures authorized in 1662 (and 
still retained in the American Prayer of Consecration) are purely 
mimetic in their significance. See above, pp. 7-9. 


CHAPTER Υ 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS IN THE ANGLICAN 
COMMUNION, 1549-1789 


WE must now trace the course of the gradual awaken- 
ing of Anglican theologians to a knowledge of primitive 
teaching and practice in the matter of the consecration 
of the Eucharist, and to an appreciation thereof, a process 
that issued finally in the introduction of the Oblation and 
Invocation in their proper ancient order, into the Prayer 
of Consecration in the American Communion Office. Our 
starting-point is, of course, the First Prayer Book of King 
Edward VI., 1549. For this book Archbishop Cranmer 
wrote practically a new prayer to take the place of the 
Latin Canon Missae. In this he made some changes of 
order. The commemorations of living and dead he com- 
bined and made to precede the Consecration. The Sup- 
plices te (the ancient Invocation par excellence, as we have 
seen) he watered away, and placed an Invocation of the 
Holy Spirit before the Narrative of Institution, in the 
position of the preliminary Epiklesis (Quam oblationem) 
of the Latin Canon. In this Invocation he put a mention 
of the“ word"! also, making a kind of compromise between 
the Eastern and the (then prevailing) Western views. 
The Greek Liturgies were accessible to Cranmer, both in 
the original and in translations, and he was probably in- 
fluenced by them. Moreover, even if they had not been 
directly known to him, the difference between the Eastern 


" Bishop Dowden in The Workmanship of the Prayer Book in its 
Literary and Liturgical A spects, London, 1899, pp. 48-49 and 51— 
53, shows the probable reasons for Cranmer’s compromise in this 
matter, as expressed in his own words. 

175 


176 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


and Western Churches upon this question was well known 
to every theological scholar. With all his cleverness in 
combining the two divergent views, Cranmer was evidently 
not satisfied in his own mind, and the fact of attempted 
compromise is marked upon the face of the Invocation. 
The fact that with the naming of the Holy Spirit he as- 
sociated the “word,” is obviously a compliance with the 
common Roman notion that the recitation of Hoc est 
corpus meum 1s the essential and effectual means of con- 
secratlon. The fact also that he made this new form of 
Invocation to be said before the rehearsal of the Narrative 
of Institution, shows his unwillingness to seem to cast any 
aspersion upon that current Thomist " view. “Hear us 
(0 mereiful Father) we beseech thee: and with thy holy 
spirit and word, vouchsafe to bbIT«»ss and sanc>ktify these 
thy gifts, and creatures of bread and wine, that they may 
be unto us the body and blood of thy most dearly beloved 
Son Jesus Christ." This hesitating mode of expression 
soon gave way to a far more radical departure from the 
Latin rite (and from all antiquity) in the Second Book of 
1552. In this, not to speak of any other excisions, the 
Invocation in the Prayer of Consecration is reduced to the 
weak, indefinite form (still retained in the English Book 
of Common Prayer), “Hear us, O merciful father, we 
beseech thee, and grant that. we receiving these thy 
creatures of bread and wine, according to thy Son our 
Saviour Jesu Christ's holy institution, in remembrance of 
his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed 
body and blood." 

In order to understand the significance of the changes 
made in the Prayer of Consecration in the Book of 1552, 
we must examine the Lutheran use in this matter, in 


‘Cf. Le Brun, Défense, etc., Paris, 1727, Article III., pp. 57-89. 
Duns Scotus, although accepting likewise Hoc est enim corpus 
meum. as the “form’’ of the Eucharist, did not ignore the rest of 
the Canon Missae. See Appendix, pp. 403-404. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 177 


view of Cranmer’s intimate knowledge of the course and 
the principles of the (then) recently effected German 
Reformation. In the year 1532 Cranmer was in Ger- 
many, on his errand as ambassador to the Emperor from 
King Henry VIII. While stationed at Ratisbon, where 
the Emperor made a long stay that year, Cranmer made 
visits to Nürnberg to see the Elector of Saxony. At 
Nürnberg he had abundant opportunity to observe all the 
changes in the Church service wrought by the Reformation 
since 1524. Here Cranmer met and saw much of Osiander, 
who, with John Brentz, was at that time engaged in pre- 
paring the Brandenburg-Nürnberg Kirchen-Ordnung of 
1533. From this quarter we may also believe that Cran- 
mer drew part of the emphasis he laid upon the “ word,” 
in the sense of Christ’s statement, “ This is My Body," in 
the short-lived Book of 1549. For at the bidding, first 
of Carlstadt,? and afterward of Luther,? the entire Canon 
of the Mass had been cut away with the exception of the 
Narrative of Institution. In the violence of their re- 
action against the abuses of the traffic in masses, they had 
excised any and all idea of sacrifice in connection with the 
Eucharist, and had done away with any petition for God 
to consecrate the elements, and said or sang aloud merely 
the Verba Testamenti, i.e. the bare Narrative of In- 
stitution. It is but just, however, to these reformers to 
recall that in thus blotting out the whole of the prayers and 
commemorations of the Canon Missae, they were simply 
carrying to its logical conclusion that tendency of Western 
Christendom to overemphasize more and more the recital 
of our Lord's words in the Canon of the Mass, which ex- 
aggeration in the course of a few hundred years had 
wrought such radical changes in the understanding of that 


! See Jacobs, The Lutheran Movement in England, revised edi- 
tion, Philadelphia, 1894, pp. 45-48, especially p. 47. 

? See Appendix, p. 413, for Carlstadt's scheme of reformed Mass. 

? See Appendix, pp. 414-415, for Luther's Formula M issae. 


178 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


same Canon, and of the interrelation of its parts one to 
the other. This trend is perhaps best summed up in the 
words of Henry de Segusia, Cardinal Hostiensis, who says, 
“The Canon of the Mass is taken for those words of Christ, 
by which the transubstantiation of the bread into the 
Body and the wine into the Blood is effected. Although 
some unlettered priests understand as the Canon whatever 
is in the Secret of the Mass."! On which Lyndwood 
comments: “And understanding Canon strictly, I think 
what Hostiensis says is true. For Canon is the same as 
rule. . . . Wherefore that rule by which the Eucharist is 
consecrated is called the Canon of the Mass, 1.6. the rule 
of those words whereby the bread is transubstantiated 
into the Body and the wine into the Blood." 

How strongly Cranmer was impressed by the Lutheran 
rite 1s seen in the experiments, obviously on German lines, 
which he made after the Order of Communion was put 
forth (March 8, 1548), and before the issuing of the 
First Book of Common Prayer in the following year. We 
have record of one occasion in particular that shows a 
remarkable parallel to the distinctively Lutheran type 
of service. “On the 12th day of May [1548], Henry VII.'s 
anniversary was kept at Westminster, the Mass sung all 
in English, with the Consecration of the Sacrament also 
spoken in English, the priest leaving out all the Canon after 
the Creed? save the Paternoster, and ministering the Com- 

! See Appendix, pp. 413-414, for the original. 

?'The meaning of this expression “ after the Creed" is not quite 
clear. It may refer to the “Lesser Canon" so called (see Scuda- 
more, Notitia Eucharistica, second edition, London, 1876, p. 412 and 
note 3), 1.6. to the offertory prayers which were cut out entirely 
by the Lutheran Reformers, and hence in the case before us we have 
an account of a service completely upon Lutheran lines. It is also 
possible that “ Creed" is a mistake for ‘‘Qui pridie," which last, spo- 
ken quickly, would sound like “Creed": and hence we may have a 
service more on the lines of the Book of 1549, 1.ε. with an Invoca- 


tion (in this case Quam oblationem) before the Narrative of Institu- 
tion, and all that“ smacked of oblation " after the Narrative excised. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 179 


munion after the King's Book."! This, taken in con- 
nection with the fact brought out in the Parliamentary 
Debate on Monday, December 16, 1548, that the title 
“ Oblation” was in the draft of the First Prayer Book but 
omitted in that Book as issued for use, certainly goes far 
to prove that Cranmer was following German models as 
closely as he dared. 

We must not forget, however, that there are some evi- 
dences to be found among the earlier German Kirchen- 
Ordnungen of a more conservative spirit than that shown 
in Luther's own use. The * Evangelical Mass" of Kaspar 
Kantz of Nördlingen, first published in 1522? not only 
contains an Invocation before the Narrative of Institution 
but also expressly includes this Epiklesis under the title, 
“Now first begins the Evangelical Mass."? The Invo- 
cation itself runs as follows: “O Father all-pitiful, merci- 
ful, everlasting God, grant that this bread and this wine 
become, and be to us, the true Body and the pure Blood of 
Thy well-beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. Who on the 
day before his passion,” ete. The more widely known 
Pfalz-Neuberg Kirchen-Ordnung of 1543 is also one of the 
rare exceptions to the Lutheran type. It has the fol- 
lowing Epiklesis (remarkable as being addressed to the 
Second Person of the Trinity), “Lord Jesus Christ, Thou 
only true Son of the living God, who hast given Thy Body 
unto bitter death for us all, and hast shed Thy Blood for 
the forgiveness of our sins, and hast bidden all Thy dis- 
ciples eat Thy Body and drink Thy Blood in remembrance 
of Thy death; we place these gifts of bread and wine, 
which Thou Thyself hast given, before Thee, and beseech 
Thee, through Thy divine grace to hallow and bless them, 


1 Wriothesley's Chronicle, II., p. 2. Camden Society, 1877. 

2 See Smend, Die evangelischen deutschen Messen bis zu Luthers 
Deutscher Messe, Göttingen, 1896, pp. 38-41 and 72-94. 

* See Appendix, pp. 415-416. Cf. the Low German version, 
Appendix, pp. 416-417; and also a Strassburg order of 1524, 
Appendix, p. 417. 


180 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


and make this bread and this wine to be Thy Body and 
Blood, and to serve unto eternal life unto all them that 
eat and drink thereof. Who with God the Father in the 
unity of the Holy Ghost, livest and reignest for ever and 
ever. Amen,"! The Narrative of Institution is then sung 
by the minister, with the elevation of both host and 
chalice. How far Cranmer was acguainted with these 
more conservative Lutheran Kirchen-Ordnungen cannot 
be determined. We cannot even be sure that he knew 
them at all. In the light of his close relation to the Ger- 
man Reformation, however, it 15 at least worthy of note 
that a weak quasi-epiklesis in the Book of 1552 was 
retained before the Narrative of Institution when all the 
rest of the Prayer of Consecration in the Book of 1549 
was cut away. 

Of this fact we are sure, however, that Cranmer was well 
acquainted with a book written by the Chapter of Cologne 
Cathedral, and laid before their Archbishop, February 3, 
1543, in answer to, and in critieism of, his own Deli- 
beratio, in which he had proposed and had set forth a 
Liturgy on the strietest Lutheran lines, drawn from the 
following Kirchen-Ordnungen : Brandenburg-Nürnberg, 
1533; Herzog Heinrich, 1539 ; and Hesse-Cassel, 1539. 
Cranmer, in one of his note-books,? makes so many ref- 
erences to the Antididagma? of the Canons of Cologne 
that it is evident that he was well acquainted with their 
trenchant criticism of their Archbishop’s proposal to con- 
secrate the Eucharist by the simple recitation of 1 Cor. 
xi. 23-25. Herman, for example, says in his Deliberatio : 
“ Immediately after this [the Sanctus] let the words of the 
Lord's Supper be sung by the Priest in German: Our Lord 
in the night in which he was betrayed, ete. These words 


! See Appendix, pp. 418-419. 

? British Museum, Royal MSS. 7 B. xi. See Church Quarterly 
Review, Vol. XXXI, No. 62, pp. 419-437 (January, 1891). 

> For full title see Appendix, p. 419. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 181 


ought to be sung by the Priest with the greatest care, and 
distinetness, so that they may be well understood by all. 
And the people shall respond to these words, Amen. 
This was observed by the whole ancient Church, and is 
observed to the present time by the Greeks. For there 
is contained in these words the whole substance of this 
Sacrament; and that it be not only administered but also 
received, to the soul’s health, that entire thing lies in the 
true understanding of these words." ' Against this mis- 
taken notion the Chapter argue very temperately yet most 
cogently, putting forth for themselves what may be best 
described as the Scotist view on this point. Their posi- 
tion can be clearly seen from the following extracts. 
Under the head, “Of the Consecration of the Eucharist, 
and the third Sacrifice of the Mass," ? they say: “ The sac- 
rifice of praise which is offered for the state of the whole 
world having been completed, there follows the chief part 
of the mass, that is the consecration of the most divine 
sacrament. . . . In this consecration the priest, in the 
name of the Church, through the invocation of God, which 
is founded entirely on His promise and the command of 
His Son, humbly prays, that God may vouchsafe to make 
that oblation of bread and mingled wine placed before 
Him, which has been offered in token of our entire sur- 
render and thankfulness, in all respects duly blessed, ap- 
proved, ratified, reasonable, and acceptable, that it may 
become to us the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
And forthwith the priest pronounces the words of the 
Evangelists: ‘Who the day before He suffered,’ and so forth. 
To which immediately he subjoins the divine words of 
Christ, by the power of which that most honorable and 
most sacred sacrament of His Body and Blood is conse- 
crated and made: THIS IS MY BODY together with the 


1 See Church Quarterly Review (already referred to), Vol. XX XI., 
No. 62, pp. 432-433 (January, 1891). 
2 See Appendix, p. 420. 


182 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


other divine words which are uttered over the chalice." 
Again, under the caption, “ Whether without the Canon- 
ical Prayer of the Church the Sacrament is consecrated," 
they say: “ Here necessity demands that we declare it to 
be raging madness, that some now think they consecrate 
the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, without 
the Catholic prayer which we call the Canon, and without 
the invocation of the Divine Name over the gifts presented 
but only by recital or reading of the words of Paul, 1 
Cor. xi., ‘The Lord Jesus in the night in which he was 
betrayed,’ ete. Though the Apostle in that place is only 
narrating historically the acts which Christ did: not in 
order to hand down any form of consecrating, by which the 
priest, the Church's minister, with invocation of the Divine 
Name might bless and sanctify the offered gifts, and not 
with his own words, but with the omnipotent words of our 
Lord Jesus Christ." ! After a few words upon the fact 
of the tradition of the Eucharistic prayer, they proceed to 
make the following pertinent illustration: “Nor is it 
diffieult to prove this in a similar matter, by the form of 
the other sacraments. Christ taught his apostles to 
baptize, saying: ‘Go ye and baptize all nations, In the 
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ 
Who then is of so dull apprehension, as dares to say, that 
a priest who recites or reads the words of the Gospel con- 
cerning the institution of baptism, who moreover does 
not utter the words of the essential form of baptism: 'I 
baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Ghost,’ truly and validly baptizes a child ? 
Especially since the priest doing this would not follow out 
the Church's office of ministry, nor say anything in reference 
to the child, but merely be reading the words of history. 
Nor would he be performing an embassy for Christ, as 
though God were baptizing through him, but only re- 
counting a thing done. So plainly also in this case it is 


! See Appendix, pp. 420-421. 


ΤΗΕ RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 183 


necessary to think, that if any one recite or read only the 
history of the institution of this sacrament, as it is recorded 
in Paul, he would not as the minister of the Church invoke 
the name of God over the gifts of bread and wine presented, 
nor direct the words of consecration to the oblation present, 
— such an one by no means consecrates, or makes a true 
sacrament according to the sense and tradition of the 
Church Catholic. Far otherwise thought and did the holy 
fathers of the Church Eastern and Western. Yea also the 
Apostles, for they as ministers of the Church invoked the 
name of God over the oblation, and consecrated it by a 
solemn prayer."! After quoting authorities to support 
their position, the Canons of Cologne close the discussion 
of this point thus: “One utterance only of the most ven- 
erable Irenzus has it pleased us to add to what has been 
said. For he in his fourth book, chapter thirty-four, says 
that ‘the bread which receives the invocation of God, 
becomes the Eucharist,’ ete. In very truth they who have 
. not the Canon, who neither invoke God, nor direct the 
words to the gifts presented, and therefore do not con- 
secrate, but only read the historical words of the Apostle 
Paul, whereby he narrates Christ's institution, not more- 
over in the manner Paul himself was wont to pronounce 
the words over the bread and wine, when he consecrated 
the Body and Blood of the Lord, — how can it be said 
that they consecrate?"? We can thus see how cautious 
Cranmer was likely to be in carrying out his liturgical 
projects. For he was of course acquainted with the more 
conservative, Scotist view of consecration of the Eu- 
charist, which laid much emphasis upon the saying of the 
whole Canon of the Mass, ? and he had also examined the 
guestion as raised by Herman von Wied, and as opposed by 
his own Cathedral Chapter. For in spite of all the influ- 
ence brought to bear by Bucer and Peter Martyr, Cranmer 


! See Appendix, p. 421. ? See Appendix, pp. 421-422. 
3 See Le Brun, Défense, etc., pp. 66-67. 


184 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


nevertheless retained an implicit Epiklesis in the Book of 
1552, although all that “ smacked of oblation” was cut 
ruthlessiy away. Thus the Church of England, though 
well-nigh losing touch with primitive and truly Catholic 
practice, was preserved by a narrow margin from the novel 
and peculiarly Lutheran use. It is this indirect quasi-invo- 
cation which really constitutes the Prayer of Consecration 
in the Book of 1552 (and in all the subsequent English 
Books of Common Prayer) a Prayer of Consecration at 
all! Without it we would have merely a statement that 
God had redeemed the world by the sacrifice of His Son, 
who had also ordained a memorial of the same, this state- 
ment being illustrated by the narrative appended. The 
promise of a return to early practice in regard to the con- 
secration of the Eucharist, held out by the Book of 1549, 


‘The restoration in 1662 of provision for the taking of the 
paten at “He took bread," and the other mimetic gestures, does 
not alter the narrative character of the rehearsal of the account of 
the Institution. On the contrary, such illustrative acts do but 
emphasize the historical nature of the recital. 

With the English Prayer of Consecration (1552-1662) may be 
compared the Reformed Episcopal use, which will be found on p. 
422 of the Appendix. The meagreness of the English form is, per- 
haps, most clearly seen from an anecdote in Mr. Athelstan Riley's 
Athos or the Mountain of the Monks, p. 73 (London, 1887). “This 
morning O celebrated the Anglican Liturgy, the Archbishop 
[of Cavalla], the archimandrite Baphides, and several monks of 
the highest dignity being present at their own request.  After- 
wards, during breakfast, the Archbishop turned round to us and 
said, ‘ Your liturgy is the liturgy of S. Gregory Dialogos. We ven- 
tured to doubt this exalted origin, and replied that we had every 
reason to believe it was compiled by certain excellent gentlemen 
who lived in the sixteenth century; but the Archbishop was not 
to be contradicted. 

“No, said he; ‘I have studied it carefully, and it is the liturgy 
of S. Gregory Dialogos, and a very good liturgy too." In other 
words, the Invocation in the present English Book is so very weak, 
that the Archbishop had made up his mind that the English Liturgy 
was a liturgy of the Pre-sanctified! 


ΤΗΕ RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 185 


and almost blighted in the Book of 1552, went long un- 
realized. At the opening of Elizabeth’s reign there would 
seem to have been some proposal made to go back to the 
Book of 1549, but this suggestion, if we may judge from 
Guest’s letter to Cecil (or to some other member of the 
Privy Council), was opposed by him and by others and 
was defeated in Committee. The Invocation in the Prayer 
of Consecration in the Book of 1549 was an object of 
special dislike. The weak Epiklesis of 1552 was retained 
in the Book of 1559, however, and remains in the English 
Book to this day, a bulwark against any mere barren 
memorialism. 

We must note briefly now the growing appreciation of 
earlier practice in the matter of Eucharistie consecration, 
upon the part of English theologians, in spite of the impe- 
'tus that Cranmer gave to the notion that the Church of 
England was committed to the so-called * Western" view, 
when he excised from the Invocation all explicit mention of 
the Holy Ghost and all direct petition for the sanctification 
of the elements, in 1552. For this reactionary tendency 
is shown in the twenty-first canon of 1603? and also re- 
mains embedded in the rubrie governing the consecration 
of additional bread or wine, inserted in the English Book of 
1662? At best it must be acknowledged that Cranmer's 
attempt at compromise left a legacy of doubtfulness to the 
English Church in this particular. Thus Bishop Andrewes 
(1555-1626) in his Preces Privatae inserts an Invocation to 
be used at the offertory, “ Thou that sittest on high with 
the Father, and art here invisibly, come and hallow the 
gifts that are set forth, and them for whom and them by 
whom and the ends whereunto they are brought." * At 

! Cf. The Church Times for May 9, 1902, p. 579; and the Church 
Quarterly Review, Vol. LIV., No. 108 (July, 1902), pp. 342-347, 
in correction of the view advanced by Dr. Gee in The Elizabethan 
Prayer Book and Ornaments, London, 1902. 


2 See Table IV., 2, p. 17. 3 See Table IV., 4, p. 17. 
* Edited by the Rev. F. E. Brightman, London, 1903, p. 122. 


186 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


the same time we find him asking in his Visitation Articles 
of 1619: “ Whether doth he [the Minister of the Parish] 
use any Bread and Wine newly brought, before the words 
of Institution be rehearsed, and the Bread and Wine 
present on the table?" ! And likewise in his Visitation 
Articles of 1625, he asks, “ Whether doth he use the 
words of Institution every time that the bread and 
wine is received?" ? Nevertheless he closes his Whit- 
sunday Sermon, May 19, 1616, as follows: “And there 
is no better way of celebrating the feast of the receiv- 
ing the Holy Ghost than so to do, with receiving the 
same body that came of It at His birth, and that came 
from It now at His rising again. And so receiving it, He 
That breathed, and He That was breathed, both of Them 
vouchsafe to breathe into those holy mysteries a Divine 
power and virtue, and make them to us the bread of life,“ 
and the cup of salvation; God the Father also sending His 
blessing upon them, that they may be His blessed means 
of this thrice-blessed effect! 'To Whom all, three Persons, 
οποια, 

Dr. Richard Crakanthorp (1567—c. 1624?) in his Defensio 
Ecclesiae Anglicanae, etc., Chap. LXXII and LXXIII, 
treats very thoroughly of the whole question, showing an 
intimate acquaintance with the patristic and early prac- 
tice, with the position maintained by the Greek Church, 
and by the Roman writers who had combated the ex- 
treme Thomist view. He declares, e.g., that Christ conse- 
crated by His blessing, Chap. LX XII., sec. 9: “In the next 
place, see how easy and how clear is our explanation of 
Christ's words: Christ took bread; He blessed the bread; 
by that blessing or prayer He consecrated it to this holy, 
sublime, heavenly, and mystie use, that it should be a 
symbol not only signifying but effectual, and bestowing 
His Body to believers instrumentally but spiritually. 


ı Minor Works, A.C.L., p. 115. 2 Minor Works, A.C.L., p. 132. 
8 Sermons, A. C.Ľ., Vol. III., p: 279. * A.C.L., pp. 476-536. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 187 


Of this bread thus blessed, eonsecrated, and by Christ’s 
blessing changed (which by force of truth the vanquished 
Bellarmine acknowledges, ‘He gave blessed bread, and 
changed by the blessing’), of the bread, I say, thus changed 
from ordinary and common use to this holy and heavenly 
use, He said, ‘This is My Body; this which I have taken, 
which I have broken, which I have consecrated, which I 
have given to you to eat, this is My Body.’”' He also 
gives, with his approval, Chap. LX XII., sec. 25-37, an ad- 
mirable summary of the arguments of Cheffontaines, and 
puts himself on record as an adherent of the truly Catholie 
belief as to consecration of the Eucharist by God's answer 
to our prayer for that end. 

Bishop Thomas Morton (1564-1659) in his treatise, Of 
the Institution of the Sacrament of the Blessed Bodie and 
Blood of Christ (by some called) the Masse of Christ, says: 
“The first transgression of the (now) church of Rome, in 
contradieting Christ his eanon, is collected out of these 
words, ‘and he blessed it,’ which concern the consecration 
of this saerament. First of the bread the text saith, *he 
blessed it’: next of the cup it is said, * when he had given 
thanks'; which words in your own judgments, are all one 
as if it should be said, he blessed it with giving of thanks. 
By the which word, blessing, he doth imply a consecration 
of this saerament. The canon of the Romish Mass at- 
tributeth the property and power of consecration of this 
sacrament only unto the repetition of these words of 
Christ, ‘This is my body,’ and ‘this is my blood,’ ete." 2 
Bishop Morton in his discussion refers to Cheffontaines, 
to the Antididagma, to Cabasilas, and to the Fathers, and 
reasserts his position from time to time with renewed em- 
phasis. “These words therefore are of declaration, and 
not of invocation. Which now Romish doctrine of con- 
secrating by reciting these words, ‘This is my body,’ etc. 

Abus Pp: 480. 

2 Guoted in Brett"s Dissertation (edition of 1838), pp. 184-135, 


188 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


your divines of Colen have judged to be a fierce madness, 
as being repugnant both to the Eastern and Western 
Churches."! “ Nevertheless, this our conclusion is not 
so to be interpreted, as . . . to exclude out of the words 
of this celebration the repetition and pronunciation of these 
words, ‘This is my body, and ‘This is my blood of the 
New Testament.’ Far be this from us, because we hold 
them to be essentially belonging to the narration of the 
institution of Christ, and are used in the Liturgy of our 
Church: for although they be not words of blessing and 
consecration (because not of petition but of repetition), 
yet are they words of direction; and withal significations 
and testifications of the mystical effects thereof." ? 

Hayward, a nephew of Bishop Overall, in notes written in 
an interleaved Prayer Book of the date 1619, says: “ That 
there is to be a certain form of words wherewith the Sac- 
rament is to be made and consecrated, we make no doubt; 
and therefore it is but a calumny of theirs that say we do 
nothing else but recitare historiam, tell the story of Christ's 
Institution, and so go toit. For we have first the recitation of 
Christ's command to have His Death and Passion remem- 
bered; and then we have a prayer to perform it as we ought 
todo. After that we have the words of consecration, as fully 
and amply as any priest whatsoever can or may use them." ? 
And again,“ When the Latinssay that the Sacrament was con- 
secrated by prayer, they mean not by every prayer; but either 
mean the whole action or whole service of the Church ; or else 
they mean this form of consecration, which wasalways recited 
in the form of a prayer, as now itis."“ Thus he takes a mid- 
dle course, at the same time he does not slur over the guasi- 
epiklesis, but rather emphasizes it, as contained in the 
Prayer Book on which he is commenting. 

Bishop John Cosin (1595-1672), in a series of notes and 

! Brett’s Dissertation (1838), p. 186. ? Ibid., p. 188. 


% In Cosin's Works, A.C.L., Vol. V., p. 106. 
* Ibid., p. 110. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 189 


collections in an interleaved Prayer Book of the date 
1638, writes, “ Thence arising, the celebrant, by prayer 
and recitation of the words of the Lord wherewith He 
instituted His holy Supper, consecrates the bread and wine 
placed before him with due reverence into the Sacrament." ! 
In the same series of notes he states that the Prayer of 
Consecration ‘consists of a commemoration of the unique 
sacrifice offered once for all by Christ upon the cross, of 
the history and institution of the Sacrament, together 
with prayer that along with the blessed bread and wine 
we may be partakers of the Body and Blood of Christ." ? 

In his History of Transubstantiation, Chap. V., sec. 5, 
we read: “ Likewise our blessed Saviour, having sanctified 
the elements by His words and prayers, gave them to His 
disciples as seals of the New Testament," etc. In the 
second chapter of the same work, sec. 3, he says: “The 
priest also, blessing or consecrating the bread and wine, 
saith thus: * Hear us, O merciful Father, we most humbly 
beseech Thee, and grant that we receiving these Thy 
creatures of bread and wine, . . . may be partakers of His 
most blessed Body and Blood: Who in the same night," 
ete.“ By so phrasing the statement, Bishop Cosin clearly 
shows that he felt the force and need of the Invocation. 

It is interesting to recall, in this connection, that in the 
Cosin Library at Durham there is a Prayer Book (printed 
in 1619) containing alterations in Bishop Cosin’s hand- 
writing. According to these the Invocation would read as 
follows: — 

“ Heare us, Ὁ Mereifull Father, we most humbly beseech 


! Cosin's Works, A.C.L., Vol. V., p. 304; cf. Vol. IV., p. 359. 
* Deinde, sese erigens, per preces solennes institutionem Sacra- 
menti et ipsa Christi instituentis verba continentes, panem in 
manus acceptum frangens, vinumque in calicem effundens, 
utrumque symbolum benedicit, atque in Sacramentum Corporis 
et Sanguinis Christi consecrat." 

τους. Vol: ν. p 332. 3 Ibid., Vol. IV., p. 58 (180). 

* Ibid., pp. 19-20 (158). 


190 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


thee [and] vouchsafe! by the powers of thy holy word and 
spirit vouchsafe! so to bless and sanctify these thy gifts 
and Creatures of Bread and wine, that we receiving them ac- 
cording to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ’s holy institu- 
tion, in remembrance of him, and to shew forth his death, 
may be partakers of his most blessed body and blood." 2 
Bishop William Forbes (1585 ?-1634), in his Conside- 
rationes Modestae, devotes the first three sections of the 
second chapter of the second book “Of the Eucharist” 
to the question, “By what words the consecration of the 
Eucharist is effected." He says: “All the more sound 
Protestants admit that the words by which the Eucharist 
is consecrated ought to be consecrative and not merely 
homiletie; that is, that they ought not to be spoken for 
the mere purpose of instructing the people, but also, nay 
rather, in order to consecrate the Eucharist. But the 
greater part altogether deny that the consecratlon is 
performed by these words and these alone, ‘Tuts 15 My 
Bopy, and “ΤῊΙΒ 15 My Broop, as Romanists contend 
against the Greeks. For they think that the consecration 
is effected not by these words of Christ alone, but by the 
mystieal prayer also whereby the descent of the Holy 
Ghost is implored, that He may sanctify the elements; 
and so by the whole service in so far as it is performed, 
both by the minister and the communicants, according 
to Christ's institution. The Scripture, it is true, favours 
more the opinion of Protestants, and very many of the 


! Note the repetition, probably unintentional, of the word 
** vouchsafe.’’ 

? See Parker's Introduction to the History of the Successive Revi- 
sions of the Book of Common Prayer, Oxford and London, 1877, 
pp. xciii and cexiii. Cf. also pp. xcvi, cexi, and cexxvi for the 
(almost identical) form in Sancroft’s “ Fair Copy," 1661. Cf. also 
Bishop Dowden’s Annotated Scottish Communion Office, pp. 286— 
289. Cf. also the form adopted by the Maryland and Pennsyl- 
vania Conventions of 1786. See below pp. 235-238, and Ap- 
pendix, pp. 434-4536. 


ΤΗΕ RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 191 


Fathers say repeatedly that the elements are consecrated 
by prayer and invocation."!  Cassander is then quoted 
at length to support this position, likewise Cheffontaines, 
the Archbishop of Spalatro, and Erasmus.  Lindanus, 
the writers of the Antididagma, Bishop Morton, and 
Vossius are also mentioned as upholding the Greek con- 
tention. Bishop Forbes, after quoting his authorities, 
closes this subject thus: “And let these things suffice 
upon this strife, in which nothing should be defined hastily 
and as if it were of faith." 2 

Archbishop Bramhall (1593-1663), in his treatise 
The Consecration and Succession of Protestant Bishops 
justified, says: ‘‘They who are ordained Priests, ought. to 
have power to consecrate the Sacrament of the Body and 
Blood of Christ, that is, to make Them present after such 
manner as They were present at the first institution; 
whether it be done by enunciation of the words of Christ, 
as it is observed in the Western Church, or by prayer, as 
it is practised in the Eastern Church; or whether these 
two be both the same thing in effect, that is, that the forms 
of the Sacraments be mystical prayers, and implicit in- 
vocations. Our Church for more abundant caution useth 
both forms." ? 

Bishop Jeremy Taylor (1613-1667) gives us his opinion, 
on the subject under consideration, in several of his writ- 
ings. The following brief extracts will serve to illustrate 
it: “After supper Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and 
made it to be a heavenly gift: He gave them bread, and 
told them it was His body ; that body, which was broken 
for the redemption of man, for the salvation of the world. 
S. Paul calls it bread, even after consecration; ‘the 
bread which we break, is it not the communication of the 
body of Christ ?’ so that by divine faith we are taught to 
express our belief of this mystery in these words: The 


! Vol. II. (A.C.L.), pp. 530-531. 2 Ibid., pp. 536-537. 
3 Works, A.C.L., Vol. III., p. 165. 


192 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


bread, when it is consecrated and made sacramental, is 
the body of our Lord: and the fraction and distribution 
of it is the communication of that body which died for us 
upon the cross. He that doubts of either of the parts 
of this proposition must either think Christ was not able 
to verify His word, and to make ‘bread’ by His benediction 
to become to us to be“ His body": or that S. Paul did not 
well interpret and understand this mystery, when he called 
it ‘bread.’”’ 1 

“The Greek fathers, and divers of the Latin, do expressly 
teach that the consecration of the elements is made by the 
prayers of the church recited by the bishop or priest. 
For the scripture tells us that Christ took the bread, He 
blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to them, saying, 
Take eat. It is to be supposed that Christ consecrated it 
before He gave it to them; and yet if He did, all the 
consecration was effected by His benedietion of it. 
And if (as the Romanists contend) Christ gave the sacra- 
ment of the Eucharist to the two disciples at Emmaus, 
it is certain there is no record of any other consecration 
but by Christ’s blessing or praying over the elements. 
It is indeed possible that something more might be done 
than was set down, but nothing less; and therefore this 
consecration was not done without the benediction; and 
therefore Hoc est corpus meum alone cannot do it; at least 
there is no warrant for it in Christ's example." ? 

“Now I demand, what did Christ’s blessing effect upon 
the bread and the chalice? any thing, or nothing? If no 
change was consequent, it was an ineffective blessing, a 
blessing that blessed not: if any change was consequent, 
it was a blessing of the thing in order to what was intended, 


1 The Lije oj our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Part 
III., ὃ XV., Discourse XIX., 2, Works, edited by Eden, ten vols., 
London, 1859-1865, Vol. II., pp. 637-638. 

? A Dissuasive from Popery, Book 1., ὃ VII., 3, Works, edited 
Eden, Vol. VI., p. 481. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 193 


that is, that it might be eucharistical, and then the follow- 
ing words, ‘This is My body, this is the blood of the New 
testament," or “ the New testament in My blood,’ were, as 
Cabasilas affirms, ἐν εἴδει διηγήσεως, ‘by way of history and 
narration’; and so the Syriac interpreter puts them to- 
gether in the place of S. Matthew, εὐλογήσας and εὐχαριστήσας, 
‘blessing’ and ‘giving of thanks’ when He did bless it He 
made it eucharistical."! “To which I add this considera- 
tion, that all words spoken in the person of another are only 
declarative and exegetical, not operative and practical, 
for in particular, if these words, Hoc est corpus meum, 
were otherwise, then the priest should turn it into his own, 
not into the body of Christ." ? “When all the office of 
Christ"s priesthood in heaven is called “intercession for 
us,’ and Himself makes the sacrifice of the cross effectual 
to the salvation and graces of His church by His prayer, 
since we are ministers of the same priesthood, can there be 
a greater glory than to have our ministry like to that of 
Jesus? not operating by virtue of a certain number of 
syllables, but by a holy, solemn, determined, and religious 
prayer, in the several manners and instances of interces- 
sion: according to the analogy of all the religions in the 
world, whose most solemn mystery was their most solemn 
prayer: I mean it in the matter of sacrificing; which also 
is true in the most mysterious solemnity of christianity, 
in the holy sacrament of the Lord’s supper, which is hal- 
lowed and lifted up from the common bread and wine 
by mystical prayers and solemn invocations of God." 3 

“What the priest does here, being an imitation of what 
Christ does in heaven, is by the sacrifice of asolemn prayer, 
and by the representing the action and passion of Christ, 


" The Real Presence and Spiritual of Christ in the Blessed Sacra- 
ment, etc., § IV., 6, Works, edited Eden, Vol. VI., pp. 43-44. 

? Op. cit., $ IV. 8, Works, edited Eden, Vol. VI., p. 45. 

% Clerus Domini, or A Discourse oj the Divine Institution . . . 
of the Office Ministerial, $ VII., 5, Works, edited Eden, Vol. I., p. 45. 


194 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


which is effeetual in the way of prayer, and by the exhibit- 
ing it to God by a solemn prayer and advocation, in imita- 
tion of, and union with Christ. All the whole office is an 
office of intercession, as it passes from the priest to God, 
and from the people to God; and then for that great 
mysteriousness, which is the sacramental change, which 
is that which passes from God unto the people by the priest, 
that also is obtained and effected by way of prayer." ! 

“The Greek churches, which have with more severity 
kept the first and most ancient forms of consecration than 
the Latin church, affirm that the consecration is made by 
solemn invocation alone, and the very recitation of the 
words spoken in the body of à prayer are used for argument 
to move God to hallow the gifts, and as an expression and 
determination of the desire. . . . The church of England 
does most religiously observe it according to the custom 
and sense of the primitive liturgies; who always did be- 
lieve the consecration not to bea natural effect, and change, 
finished in any one instant, but a divine alteration con- 
sequent to the whole ministry: that is, the solemn prayer 
and invocation." ? 

We note with much interest that these opinions of 
Bishop Taylor's found special outlet in the form of service 
which he set forth for use while the Book of Common 
Prayer was under the ban of the Commonwealth. In 
An Office or Order jor the Administration of the holy Sacra- 
ment of the Lord's Supper, according to the Way of the 
A postolical Churches, and the Doctrine of the Church of 
England, we have the following Invocation:— 

“Have mercy upon us, Ὁ heavenly Father, according to 
Thy glorious mercies and promises, send Thy holy Ghost 
upon our hearts, and let Him also descend upon these 
gifts, that by His good, His holy, His glorious presence, 
He may sanctify and enlighten our hearts, and He may 
bless and sanctify these gifts. 


! Clerus Domini, Works, edited Eden, Vol. I., pp. 47-48. 
? Op. cit., Works, edited Eden, Vol. I., pp. 48-49. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 195 


“That this bread may become the holy body of Christ. 
* Amen. 


“And this chalice may become the life-giving blood of 
Christ. 
* Amen. 


“That it may become unto us all that partake of it this 
day, a blessed instrument of union with Christ, of pardon 
and peace, of health and blessing, of holiness and life 
eternal, through Jesus Christ our Lord. 


* Amen." ! 


Herbert Thorndike (1598-1672) treats of the consecra- 
tion of the Eucharist in more than one of his writings. 
He goes thoroughly into the subject, having made himself 
well acquainted with the patristic and liturgical aspects 
of the case. No English theologian, up to his time, has 
so completely and definitely worked out the whole matter. 
In his treatise Of Religious Assemblies and the Public Service 
of God: A Discourse according to Apostolicall Rule and 
Practice, printed in 1642, he says: “To me it seemeth 
unquestionable that the thanksgiving wherewith our Lord 
in the Gospel is said to have celebrated this Sacrament 
at His last supper, contained also prayer to God for the 
effect to which the elements, when they become this 
Sacrament, are deputed: and that the Church, upon His 
example, hath always frequented His institution with the 
like, rehearsing His institution out of the Gospel, and 
praying for the effect of it at the present, after the thanks- 
giving hitherto described: and so — whereas in the sense 
of the Church of Rome the elements are consecrated, that 
is, transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ, 
by rehearsing the affirmative words of Christ, This is 
My body, this is My blood, as operative — in the true 
sense of the Church they are consecrated, that is, deputed 
to be this Sacrament, and to the effect of it, by the prayer 


1 Works, edited Eden, Vol. VIII., p. 624. 


196 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


of the congregation, grounded upon the institution of 
Christ and the promise which it implieth." ! 

In his Epilogue, Part III.,entitled The Laws of the Church, 
he devotes nearly all Chapter IV. to ἃ most thorough ex- 
amination of the question. For the sake of brevity, 
merely the first two sections will be quoted. “Coming 
now to consider wherein the consecration of the eucharist 
consists, I find no opinion on foot, but that which hath 
taken possession by the authority of the school-doctors ; — 
that it is performed by the recital of these words, ‘This 
is My Body, This is My Blood,’ in the canon (that is, 
the canonical or regular prayer for the consecration of the 
eucharist) of the mass. For those that have set aside 
this prayer, and do not allow the opinion, that these words 
are operative to the effecting of that which the institution 
of the eucharist promises, though they retain the recital 
of them in the action, yet have not declared any common 
agreement, wherein they intend to maintain the conse- 
cration of the eucharist to stand. 

* And is it not then free for me to declare, that I could 
never rest satisfied with this opinion of the school-doctors; 
as finding it to offer violence to common sense, and the 
truest intention of that which we may see done in conse- 
crating the eucharist? For when our Lord takes the 
elements in His hands and blesses them (or gives God 
thanks over them), then breaks the bread, and, delivering 
them, bids His disciples take and eat them, because they 
are His Body and Blood; is it not manifest, that they 
are so called in regard of something which He had already 
done about them, when, delivering them, He calls them at 
that present time of delivering them, that which He could 
not call them afore, His “ Body and Blood?'"? His final 
opinion is thus expressed in the treatise The Reformation 
of the Church οἱ England better than that of the Council of 


! Thorndike’s Works, A.C.L., Vol. I. (Part I.), p. 342. 
? Works, A.C.L., Vol. IV. (Part I.), pp. 50-51. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 197 


Trent, written within two years of his death: “ The Greek 
Church holds, that consecration is done by the prayers of 
the Church: the Latin Church, by the words of our Lord 
‘This is My Body — This is My Blood of the New Testa- 
ment": which they call ‘operating,’ because the repeating 
of them they say makes the change. This conceit hath 
in it more appearance of magic, than of the word of God, 
if we take it as it sounds; which we have no reason to do. 
For the institution of our Lord being executed by cele- 
brating the sacrament; and the celebration of the sacra- 
ment requiring a prayer, that the presence of the Body 
and Blood, which the institution promises, may be made 
good: what doubt is there, that this produces the effect ? 
But by virtue of the institution; containing the narrative 
of what our Lord did, and commanded to be done. And 
therefore those words are to be repeated in celebrating 
the sacrament; not as'operating, but as signifying the 
promise which the precept insinuates, when our Lord 
says, ‘Do this in remembrance of Me. For so are we 
assured, that the elements, which the Church consecrates, 
are the Body and Blood of Christ; as those were, whereof 
our Lord speaks. And therefore it was our Lord's ‘blessing’ 
or ‘thanksgiving,’ which made them so; according to an 
observation in my book, that εὐλογία and εὐχαριστία signifies 
no less than the celebration of the eucharist in the ancient 
fathers. What the thanksgiving used in the services, that 
are extant, was wont to contain, is there to be seen.! 
But it ended in a prayer; — that the Holy Ghost may 
come down upon the elements proposed, to make them 
the Body and Blood of Christ." ? 

Thorndike’s opinion in reference to the Prayer of Con- 
secration in the English Book is well worthy of our atten- 
tion. “The prayer, which we consecrate with, seemeth 

' Cf. The Service of God at Religious Assemblies, Chap. X., δὲ 40-- 


54, A.C.L., Vol. I. (Part I.), pp. 337-349. 
? Works, A.C.L., Vol. V., pp. 544—545. 


198 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


agreeable to the intent of God’s Church; but more agree- 
able in that form, which the first Book of Edward the VI. 
(revived by the Scottish liturgy) prescribeth."! Thorn- 
dike’s learning was at the service of the Nonjurors after- 
wards, and he is constantly referred to by those of them 
who supported the Invocation (among the “usages”’). 
His treatment of the subject will well repay a careful study 
to-day. The liturgical discoveries made since his time 
would alter merely a few of the details of his arguments, 
and would serve only to strengthen his position. The 
English theologians of the seventeenth century made a 
most profound and thorough study of the Eueharistie 
doctrine and practice of the early and undivided Church, 
and Thorndike's discussion of the question of consecra- 
tion, e.g., illustrates all that is best in English theological 
methods and results. 

Bishop Thomas Wilson (1663-1755), in his Sacra 
Privata, without any desire to invalidate the English 
Prayer of Consecration, gives us further evidence of the 
strength of the feeling in favour of a more explicit Epiklesis. 
MS. iii. prefixes by way of title to the devotions for the 
“ Lord's Supper,’ “Private devotions at the Altar, taken 
out of the most ancient offices of the Church; to render 
our present Communion-service more agreeable to Apos- 
tolie usage, and more acceptable (I hope) to God, and bene- 
ficial to all that partake thereof. Until it shall please Him 
to put it into the hearts and power of such as ought to do 
it, to restore to us the First Service of Edw. VI. Or 
such as shall be more conformable to the appointment 
of Christ and His Apostles and their successors. Which 
may the Divine Majesty vouchsafe to grant, for His sake 
Who first ordained this holy Sacrament. Amen.” ? 

We also read a little farther on: “‘ Immediately after the 

1 Just Weights and Measures, Chap. XXII., $7, Works, A.C.L., 


Vol. V., pp. 245-246. Cf. Vol. I. (Part I.), pp. 380-382. 
? Wilson's Works, A.C.L., Vol. V., pp. 73-74. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 199 


Prayer of Consecration. We offer unto Thee, our King 
and our God, this bread and this cup. 

“We give Thee thanks for all Thy mercies, beseeching 
Thee to send down Thy Holy Spirit upon this sacrifice, 
that He may make this bread the Body of Thy Christ, and 
this cup the Blood of Thy Christ: and that all we, who 
are partakers thereof, may thereby obtain remission of 
our sins, and all other benefits of His Passion." ! 

Hamon L’Estrange’s Alliance of Divine Offices contains 
the following statements: — 

“Saying, Take eat, this is My body. The recital of these 
words pass in the common vogue for a consecration; were 
I Romishly inclined, I should rather impute unto them 
the power of transubstantiation, for that a bare narrative 
can be qualified to consecrate is certainly new divinity, 
unknown to Scripture, and antiquity interpreting it. 
Therefore I must adhere in judgment to those learned 
men who derive consecration from the word of God and 
prayer, the very way by which our Saviour Himself 
sanctified those elements in His first institution, Matt. 
xxvi. 26, εὐλογήσας, ‘calling upon God for His blessing,’ 
and εὐχαριστήσας, 'giving thanks, in which action it 
must be supposed that Christ had more than a general 
design of saying grace, as we phrase it, for those elements 
as creatures ordained for common nutriment, viz. an 
intention of invocating God's blessing upon them, in 
reference to those ends for which He meant by .His 
institution, to separate and depute them. And though 
the primitive fathers, in the act of consecration, did usually 
join the narrative of Christ's institution with the words of 
blessing and thanksgiving, thereby as it were showing 
their commission; yet were they far.from imagining 
that the elements were sanctified any other way than by 
prayer, if they must be thought (as sure none will question 


! Wilson's Works, A.C.L., Vol. V., p. 74, and notes “i” and 
σα. Vol: I. (Part IL), p. 972. 


200, THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


it) to mean as they said.’’' After quoting patristic and 
liturgical testimony, he concludes, “Now it were, I say, 
vain to prefix with the Latins, or to affix with the Greeks, 
such an invoeation, if the bare affirmative words of our 
Saviour’s institution were consecration all-sufficient." 3 

John Ernest Grabe £(1666-1711), the well-known 
scholar, was so impressed with the meagreness of the 
English Prayer of Consecration that he did not like to 
receive the Holy Communion consecrated according to it, 
and preferred to receive the Sacrament at the hands of 
Bishop Hickes, who used the form prescribed in the First 
Book of Edward VI. After his death a Latin treatise 
by him was published (together with an English transla- 
tion of the same), entitled De Forma Consecrationis Eucha- 
ristiae, etc.“ It would be interesting to quote from this 
work at length, but as its arguments have been covered 
already (in Chapter IIL), it will suffice to quote briefly, 
from some Papers appended to this treatise, the grounds 
of its author's doubtfulness as to the validity of Eucha- 
ristie consecration by the form prescribed in the English 
Book of 1662. 

“To the due Consecration of the Bread and Wine mixt 
with Water, as the Matter of this Sacrament, is required 
a determin'd special Form of Words, or Prayer, or both. 
I say, a special Form, and a determin'd one, if not in Sound, 


UA CL: 5. 3t5. 2 Ibid pr. 317. 

3 See The Doctrine of a Middle State . . ., by Bishop Archi- 
bald Campbell, London, 1721, p 79. Cf. also Bishop Brett's 
Dissertation appended to his work A Collection of the Principal 
Liturgies, ete., London, 1720, pp. 357—358 (p. 404, edition of 1838). 
Cf. also the Preface to Whiston's The Liturgy of the Church of 
England reduced nearer to the Primitive Standard, London, 1713 
(pp. 6-7, Halľs reprint). 

* London, 1721. The English title, which very accurately 
describes the work, is: A Defence of the Greek Church against the 
Roman, in the Article of the Consecration of the Eucharistical Ele- 
ments. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 201 


yet in Sense, perfect. For I do not think that a vague 
general Mention of Christ’s Sufferings, and a Thanksgiving 
to God for them, with Prayer to make us Partakers of 
the Benefits of the same, will consecrate the Bread and 
Wine into Christ's Body and Blood, or make them a 
Sacrament of the same: At least I do not see, how any 
one can be so sure, as we ought to be in this Matter, that 
such a Thanksgiving and Prayer is valid and sufficient 
to the said Consecration. . . . If the Form, by which 
the Eucharistical Bread and Wine are made the Sacra- 
ment of Christ"s Body and Blood, were only the Words of 
our Saviour This is my Body, This is my Blood, rehearsed 
and pronounced over them by the Priest, as the Church 
of Rome, and some of the Protestants, especially the 
Lutherans, do teach; then no Objection could be made 
against the Form of Consecration of the H. Eucharist in 
the Church of England, since she expressly Commandeth 
and directeth in the Rubrick, that no Bread and Wine 
should be given to the Communicants as Sacramental, 
but over which the aforesaid Words have been pronounced 
by the Priest. But I have prov'd . . . that the Conse- 
eration of the Eucharistical Symbols is perform’d, not, 
or not only, by the Rehearsal of the aforesaid Words of 
Christ, but chiefly, if not only, by the Prayer of the Priest 
or Minister, as the Greek Church and some of the Protes- 
tants, especially those who are called Calvinists, (tho 
they wisely refuse this Denomination) do assert." ! 

“I am perswaded, I have proved . . . that the Primi- 
tive Fathers next to the Apostles Age, and much more 
downward, did believe, that the consecrated Bread and 
Wine were chang’d, if not in their Substance, yet in their 
inward Qualities; and that they not only represented 
and exhibited to the Faith of the Communicants the Body 
and Blood of Christ expired and pour’d out on the Cross; 
but that the Eucharistical Symbols themselves were verily 


1 Op. cit., pp. 85-86. 


202 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


made in a mysterious Manner the Body and Blood of our 
erucified Saviour. . . . And this Consecration or Sanc- 
tification of the Bread and Wine they believed was wrought 
by the Power of Almighty God and his Holy Spirit, who 
being invited and called down by the Prayer of the Priest, 
descended upon the Bread and Wine on the Altar, and 
enriched "em with all the Virtues and Graces, with which 
the personal Body and Blood of Christ did abound, and 
so made them in this, and perhaps, in a yet more myste- 
rious and incomprehensible Manner, to be verily the Body 
and Blood of Christ; as the Holy Ghost did formerly 
come upon the blessed Virgin, and formed in her Womb 
the personal Body and Blood of Christ. 

“Now if this Belief of the Primitive Christians. . . be 
true, and if 1500 Years after, the Form of Prayer for the 
said Sanctification and sacramental Change of the Eu- 
charistical Bread and Wine by the Power and Spirit 
of God, hath been changed upon the Disbelief of this 
mysterious Doctrine, not by Chance or base Ignorance; 
and if now, both the Priest Officiating, and the People 
communicating, do likewise disbelieve the same, or have no 
Notion of it at all, and consequently do neither desire in 
their Hearts, nor pray with their Mouths to God for such 
a Sanctification of the Bread and Wine by the Holy Ghost; 
yea, if they ask no Blessing at all upon the Bread and 
Wine, but only for themselves, namely, that they receiv- 
ing outwardly those Elements, may at the same time in- 
wardly by Faith receive the Body and Blood of Christ, 
or the Benefits of his Sufferings; in this Case, I say, it 
may reasonably be doubted, if not denied, that God doth 
bless and sanctify by his Holy Spirit the Bread and Wine, 
and make them the Body and Blood of Christ." ! 

“ From all Testimonies and Monuments, "tis plain, that 
all Tongues and Nations in all Ages of the Christian Church 
have called, and almost all still do call to God, for his 

! Grabe, op. cit., pp. 87-88. 


ΤΗΕ RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 203 


blessed Spirit to bless and sanctify the Eucharistical Sym- 
bols of Bread and Wine. And as I do not question, that 
the self-same Holy Spirit hath directed them thereunto 
by his Apostles . . . and taught them how to Pray in 
the Celebration of the most Holy Sacrament; so I doubt 
very much (not to be positive and rash in Judgment) if 
a good Spirit hath abolished this solemn Prayer and 
Invocation of God for the Sanctification of the Eucharis- 
tical Elements; by which Omission the Consecration is 
made, if not void and null, yet uncertain and doubtful." ! 

Joseph Bingham (1668-1723), in his famous Origines 
Ecclesiasticae (Book XV., Chap.III., sec. 12), is also a plain 
witness. “ Now this [the ‘Form’ of Consecration] anciently 
was not a bare repetition of those words, ‘Hoc est corpus 
meum, this is my body,’ which for many ages has been the 
current doctrine of the Romish schools; but a repetition 
of the history of the institution, together with prayers 
to God, that He would send his Holy Spirit upon the gifts 
and make them become the body and blood of Christ; 
not by altering their nature and substance but their 
qualities and powers, and exalting them from simple ele- 
ments of bread and wine to become types and symbols 
of Christ's flesh and blood, and efficacious instruments of 
conveying to worthy receivers all the benefits of his death 
and passion." ? 

The opinion of Charles Wheatly (1686-1742), in his 
Rational Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer, must 
be given at length because of its pertinence and sobriety. 

“Chapter VI., sec. xxii. — Of the Prayer of Consecration. 

“The ancient Greeks and Romans would not taste of 
their ordinary meat and drink till they had hallowed it 
by giving the first parts of it to their gods: the Jews would 
not eat of their sacrifice till Samuel came to bless it: and 

! Op. cit., p. 89. 

2 Edition revised by the Rev. Richard Bingham (in eight vols.), 
London, 1834, Vol. V., p. 251. 


204 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


the, primitive Christians always began their common 
meals with a solemn prayer for a blessing: a custom so 
universal, that it is certainly a part of natural religion: 
how much more then ought we to expect the prayers of 
the Priest over this mysterious food of our souls, before we 
eat of it! especially since our Saviour himself did not 
deliver this bread and wine until he had consecrated them 
by blessing them, and giving thanks. So that this prayer 
is the most ancient and essential part of the whole Com- 
munion-office; and there are some who believe that the 
Apostles themselves, after a suitable introduction, used the 
latter part of it, from those words, who in the same night, 
etc., and it is certain that no Liturgy in the world hath 
altered that particular. 

“42. But besides this, there was always inserted in the 
primitive forms a particular petition for the descent of 
the Holy Ghost upon the Sacramental Elements, which 
was also continued in the first Liturgy of king Edward VI. 
in very express and open terms. Hear us, O merciful 
Father, we beseech thee, and with thy Holy Spirit and Word 
vouchsafe to blg«ess and sanctify these thy gifts and creatures 
of bread and wine, that they may be unto us the Body and 
Blood oj thy most dearly beloved Son Jesus Christ, who in 
the same night, ete. This, upon the scruples of Bucer, 
(whom I am sorry I have so often occasion to name,) 
was left out at the review in the fifth of king Edward; 
and the following sentence, which he was pleased to allow 
of, inserted in its stead; viz. Hear us, O merciful Father, 
we most humbly beseech thee; and grant that we receiving 
these thy creatures of bread and wine, according to thy Son 
our Saviour Jesus Christ’s holy institution, in remembrance 
of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most 
blessed Body and Blood: who, in the same night, etc. In 
these words, it is true, the sense of the former is still 
implied, and consequently by these the elements are now 
consecrated, and become the body and blood of our 
Saviour Christ. 


ΤΗΕ RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 205 


“In the rubrie indeed, after the form of Administration, 
the Church seems to suppose that the Consecration is 
made by the words of Institution: for there it says, that 
if all the consecrated bread and wine be all spent before all 
have communicated, the Priest is to consecrate more according 
to the jorm before prescribed; beginning at Our Saviour 
Christ in the same night, etc. for the blessing of the bread ; 
and at Likewise after supper, ete. for the blessing of the 
Cup. "This rubric was added in the last review: but to 
what end, unless to save the Minister some time, does 
not appear. But what is very remarkable is, that it was 
taken from the Seoteh Liturgy, which expressly calls the 
words of Institution the words oj Consecration; though the 
compilers of it had restored the sentence that had been 
thrown out of king Edward's second Common Prayer, and 
united it with the clause in our present Liturgy, imagin- 
ing, one would think, that the elements were not conse- 
erated without them. For though all churches in the 
world have, through all ages, used the words of Institution 
at the time of Consecration; yet none, I believe, except 
the Church of Rome, ever before attributed the Conse- 
eration to the bare pronouncing of those words only: 
that was always attributed, by the most ancient Fathers, 
to the prayer of the Church. The Lutherans and Calvin- 
ists indeed both agree with the Papists, that the Conse- 
cration is made by the bare repeating the words of In- 
stitution; the reason perhaps of which is, because the 
words of Institution are the only words recorded by 
the Evangelists and S. Paul, as spoken by our Saviour 
when he administered to his disciples. But then it 
should be considered, that it is plain enough that our 
Saviour used other words upon the same occasion, though 
the very words are not recorded; for the Evangelists 
tell us, that he gave thanks, and blessed the bread and wine: 
and this sure must have been done in other words than 
those which he spoke at the delivery of them to his dis- 


200 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ciples: for blessing and thanksgiving must be performed 
by some words that are addressed to God, and not by any 
words directed to men: and therefore the words which 
our Saviour spake to his disciples could not be the whole 
consecration of the elements, but rather a declaration 
of the effect which was produced by his consecrating or 
blessing them. And therefore I humbly presume, that 
if the Minister should at the consecration of fresh ele- 
ments, after the others are spent, repeat again the whole 
form of consecration, or at least from those words, Hear 
us, O merciful Father, ete., he would answer the end of the 
rubric, which seems only to require the latter part of the 
form from those words, who in the same night, ete., be 
always used at such consecration." 

I make no apology for so long a quotation. The 
temperate, judicial, well-balanced exegesis of Wheatly is 
too much neglected nowadays. He makes out the best 
case possible (when early practice and doctrine is taken 
into consideration), for a rite valid, but meagre. 

We must now retrace our steps for a moment to consider 
the Prayer of Consecration in the Book of Common Prayer 
for Scotland, of 1637. In so doing we recall the fact that 
the explicit Invocation of the Holy Spirit in it, was not 
so repugnant to the mind of the Scottish Calvinists as 
we might carelessly suppose. Calvin in formulating his 
doctrine of the Eucharist laid great stress upon the work of 
the Holy Ghost, “by Whom, though the Body and Blood 
of Christ be in heaven, yet are they communicated truly 
to the worthy receiver."? Hence after a time his follow- 
ers began to make provision for the Invocation of God's 
blessing upon the elements in the celebration of the Lord's 
Supper. Thus in the Scottish Confession of Faith, 


! A Rationai Illustration, ete., Oxford, 1846, pp. 254-256. 

? Cf. Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, Vol. I., pp. 455-456, 
especially notes 1 and 2 on the last-mentioned page. Cf. also 
p 472. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 207 


1560, we have a mode of statement that makes for an 
explicit Invocation later. In Article xxi., “ Of the Sacra- 
mentis," we read: “ And alswa [wee beleeve], that in the 
Supper richtlie used, Christ Jesus is so joined with us, that 
hee becummis very nurishment and fude of our saules. 
Not that we imagine anie transubstantiation of bread into 
Christes body, and of wine into his naturall blude, as the 
Papistes have perniciouslie taucht and damnablie beleeved ; 
bot this unioun and conjunction, quhilk we have with the 
body and blude of Christ Jesus in the richt use of the Sacra- 
ments, wrocht be operatioun of the haly Ghaist, who by 
trew faith carryis us above al things that are visible, 
carnal, and earthly, and makes us to feede upon the 
body and blude of Christ Jesus, quhilk wes anes broken 
and shed for us, quhilk now is in heaven, and appearis 
in the presence of his Father for us: And zit notwith- 
standing the far distance of place quhilk is betwixt 
his body now glorified in heaven and us now mortal 
in this eird, zit we man assuredly beleve that the bread 
quhilk wee break, is the communion of Christes bodie, 
and the cupe quhilk we blesse, is the communion of 
his blude." ! 

In the manuscript draft of a Liturgy, prepared in King 
James's reign, and sent up to London in 1629? (if not ear- 
lier), we find the following Invocation in the Communion 
Office: ‘‘Mercifull father wee beseech thee that we re- 
ceiving these thy creatures of bread and wine, according 
to thy sonne our Saviour his holy institution, may be 
made partakers of his most blissed body and blood. 
Send doune o Lord thy blissing upon this Sacrament, that 
it may be unto us the effectual exhibitive instrument of 


! Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, Vol. III., pp. 468-469. 
Cf. Craig's Catechism (1581), Schaff, op. cit., Vol. I., p. 700. 

2 See Scottish Liturgies of the Reign of James VI., edited by the 
Rev. G. W. Sprott, Edinburgh and London, 1901, Introduction, 
pp. xxxvii.-xxxviii., xli., xlvi. 


208 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


the Lord Jesus." ' This Invocation is contained in a long 
prayer that leads up to and ends in the Lord’s Prayer. 
After this follows the Narrative of Institution, preceded 
by the rubrie: “ The prayer ended the Minister shall repeate 
the words of the institution for consecrating the elements 
and say, The Lord Jesus the same night," ete? This rubrie 
has been rewritten on the margin in the following altered 
form, “Then shall the Minister pray after this manner, 
and read the words of the Institution." Another hand has 
put this in, evidently to suit the views and practice of the 
anti-prelatical party, many of whom were in the habit of 
inserting an Invocation into the Book of Common Order 
when they used it? "Thus strangely enough the first 
impulse that led to the restoration of the explicit In- 
vocation of the Holy Spirit in the Book of 1637 came 
from à source whence we should not have been disposed 
to expect it. This draft was rejected and the Book of 
1637 was prepared by Bishops John Maxwell of Ross and 
James Wedderburne of Dunblane, under the supervision of 
Archbishop Laud and King Charles himself. In this we 
have a return to the Invocation of the first Book of Ed- 
ward VI., to which was added the latter part of the quasi- 
epiklesis of 1552, thus:*— 

“Hear us, O merciful Father, we most humbly beseech 
thee, and of thy almighty goodness vouchsafe so to bless 
and sanctify with thy word and holy Spirit these thy 
gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that they may be 
unto us the body and blood of thy most dearly beloved 
Son; so that we, receiving them according to thy Son 

! Sprott, op. cit., p. 93. 

? [bid., p. 94. 3 Tbid., notes, pp. 151-154. 

£ See Bishop Dowden's Annotated Scottish Communion Office, 
pp. 25-42; Pullan's History of the Book oj Common Prayer, pp. 
274-279; also The Book oj Common Prayer . . . for the Use oj 
the Church oj Scotland . . . (1637), edited by the Rev. James 


Cooper, Edinburgh and London, 1904, Introduction, pp. vii.— 
xxxii., and Note H, pp. 265-272. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 209 


our Saviour Jesus Christ’s holy institution, in remembrance 
of his death and passion, may be partakers of the same his 
most precious body and blood.” 

A spirit of compromise with the then-prevailing Anglican 
view shows itself in the rubric for a second consecration,' 
yet the force of the Invocation is unmistakable. 

Although this Book (of 1637) was swept out of use at 
once, and although the English Book of Common Prayer 
fared no better a few years later at the hands of the Parlia- 
ment, yet even in the Directory put forth to take the place 
of the proseribed Books do we find evidence of an appre- 
ciation of the Invocation. “ After this exhortation . 
the Minister is to begin the Action with sanctifying and 
blessing the Elements of Bread and Wine set before him 
. . . having first, in a few words, showed, That those 
Elements, otherwise common, are now set apart and sanc- 
tified to this holy use, by the Word of Institution and 
Prayer. 

“ Let the Words of Institution be read out of the Evange- 
lists, or out of the first Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the 
Corinthians, chap. xi. 23, 1 have received of the Lord, 
etc., to the 27th verse, which the Minister may, when he 
seeth requisite, explain and apply. 

“ Let the Prayer, Thanksgiving, or Blessing of the Bread 
and Wine, be to this effect : — 

*, , . Earnestly to pray to God, the Father of all mercies, 
and God of all consolation, to vouchsafe His gracious 
presence, and the effectual working of His Spirit in us; 
and so to sanctify these Elements both of Bread and Wine, 
and to bless His own Ordinance, that we may receive by 
faith the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, crucified for us, 
and so to feed upon Him, that He may be one with us, and 
we with Him." ? 


! See Table IV., 3, p. 17. 
2 See The Westminster Directory, edited by the Rev. T. Leishman, 
Edinburgh and London, 1901, pp. 49—51, and notes, pp. 126-127. 


210 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Among the Exceptions made by the Presbyterians at 
the Savoy Conference, to the English Book of Common 
Prayer, we find the following in reference to the “ Prayer 
at the consecration," “ We conceive that the manner of 
the consecrating of the elements is not here explicit and 
distinct enough.’ ὁ This objection was one that was 
felt strongly by many others, such as Thorndike, and it 
failed of effecting an Improvement in the Book of 1662, 
either because of that excessive caution so characteristic 
of the Anglican clergy, or because of an unwillingness to 
allow the imperfection of a form for which the Church 
party had so valiantly contended hitherto. 

We should perhaps note, before going further, that 
although Archbishop Laud would have preferred to have 
had the English Book of Common Prayer used in Scotland, 
yet he approved of the Invocation in the Scottish Book 
of 1637. “ "Tis true, this passage is not in the Prayer of 
Consecration in the Service-book of England; but I 
wish with all my heart it were. For though the conse- 
cration of the elements may be without it, yet it is much 
more solemn änd full by that invocation." ? 

Although the Book of 1637 was rejected by the Presbyte- 
rians,and by the Church revisers of 1661-1662, the explicit 

1 See Liturgia Expurgata, or The Prayer Book Amended accord- 
ing to the Presbyterian Revision ο) 1661, etc., by Charles W. Shields, 
Philadelphia, 1864, p. 162; cf. pp. 121, 124-125. Cf. also Gillespie's 
A Dispute against the English-Popish Ceremonies, ete. (1660), 
Part 4, Chap. VII., $ V., pp. 352-353. 

For forms of Invocation now in use among Presbyterians, see 
Dowden, Annotated Scottish Communion Office, pp. 270-271. Cf. 
also Professor Cooper's edition of the Book of 1637, Note H, p. 267, 
col. 4; and the Euchologion, A Book of Common Order . . . issued 
by the Church Service Society, last edition, Edinburgh and London, 
1905, pp. 296-297; cf. pp. 290-292; cf. The Book of Common 
Worship, Philadelphia, 1905 (set forth for“ voluntary use" by the 
General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., in 


that year), p. 78. 
? Laud's Works, A.C.L., Vol. IIL, p. 354. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 211 


Invocation in the Prayer of Consecration bore fruit later 
through the Nonjuring school of theologians, who were un- 
trammelled by any connection with the State and by any 
considerations of mere expedieney. For it is owing to the 
theologians of this school, whether remaining in the Church 
of England, or separated from it, that the Scottish and the 
American Churches have returned to the primitive and 
Apostolie usage in the consecration of the Eucharist. To 
their writings and opinions on this subject we must there- 
fore give due heed. They kept alive the tradition and 
practice of the early ages through a time of indifference 
and carelessness, and against strong and determined 
opposition. John Johnson (1662-1725) of Cranbrook 
forms a link between the Nonjurors and those theologians 
of the English Church, such as Thorndike, whom we have 
already quoted. One or two brief extracts suffice to show 
his position. “I apprehend that the Eucharistical Sacri- 
fice, that is, the representative Body and Blood of Christ, 
were, by the primitive Fathers, supposed to be conse- 
crated in a more perfect manner than any sacrifice under 
the Law could be: for in all the Liturgies, after the oblation 
of the Bread and Win2 as th» memorials of the grand 
Sacrifice, there is a solemn prayer that God would send 
His Spirit or His Divine benediction for the further 
consecration of them, after they had first been offere as 
a Sacrifice to God. And this is th» most perfect conse- 
eration that inanimate creatures are capable of; and such 
a consecration does apparently best fit and comport with 
the Eucharist, as being the most eminent mystery and 
hierurgy that ever was instituted by Almighty God." ! 

“I now proceed to prove, 

“3. That the ancients believed the consecration of the 
elements was finished by means of the prayer of invocation. 
And since I have already made it appear, that it is the 
Holy Spirit, Which eonsecrates the gifts, and makes the 


! John Johnson's Works, A.C.L., Vol. I., p. 272. 


212 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


true life-giving Body of Christ; and that in the primitive 
Church, the prayer for the descent of the Spirit to render 
the Bread the Body of Christ comes after the words of 
institution and the commemorative oblation, therefore 
the thing is in effect proved already; for if the elements 
were by either or both the former means fully consecrated, 
what occasion to invoke the Holy Spirit for the further 
consecration of them?" ! 

“One great and fundamental mistake of . . . writers 
on the same subject, both at home and abroad, is, a conceit 
that our Saviour blessed the Bread, only by saying, 
‘Blessed be Thou, O Lord our God and King, Who bring- 
est forth Bread out of the earth;’ and the Cup, by saying, 
‘ Blessed be Thou, ete., Who createst the fruit of the vine." 
The only grounds for this opinion are, that the Jewish 
Rabbies tell us, that their forefathers did by these words 
bless the bread and wine at their entertainments. The 
Christians of the Primitive Church by their constant prac- 
tice have informed us, that they believed our Saviour to 
have blessed the Bread and Wine, not only by praising 
God for them, but by appointing them to represent His 
Body and Blood; by offering them to God as pledges of 
His Body and Blood, and by praying that God would 
enrich them with the Holy Spirit and make them His 
Body and Blood in life and power to the receivers." ? 

“The Invocation of the Holy Ghost upon the symbols 
was certainly thought necessary by the primitive Church; 
and if this were necessary in the primitive ages, it cannot 
be unnecessary now. I have fully proved, that this was 
the universal sentiment of all for some hundred years 
after Christ, and have showed what foundation this doc- 
trine has in Scripture; and I have already in this chap- 
ter observed, that the Eucharist was designed to be One, 
as sanctified by the One Spirit. I think the generality 


! John Johnson's Works, A.C.L., Vol. I., pp. 334-335. 
? Ibid., Vol. II., pp. 16-17. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 213 


of Protestants are agreed, that the Consecration is per- 
formed chiefly by prayer. In this the Lutherans and 
Calvinists seem united; and they do likewise generally 
esteem the rehearsal of the Words of Institution to be 
necessary to this purpose. The Lutherans do also speak 
very favourably of the Invocation of the Holy Spirit, 
though it does not appear that they use it. The Church 
of Rome first laid aside this Invocation at the latter end 
of the sixth century, but it was still retained in the 
Gallican Liturgy, which was also used in the English 
Chureh till toward the middle of the eighth century; and 
from that time forward the Roman Liturgy prevailed in 
the whole Western Church, and the Holy Ghost was no 
longer invoked at the consecration of the Eucharist. 
The Greek and Eastern Churches do constantly and uni- 
versally practise it to this day. Our first Reformers here 
in England restored this most pious and Apostolical 
Prayer (though they placed it before the Words of In- 
stitution, contrary to the ancient method); but in the 
review of our Liturgy, two or three years after, it was 
wholly omitted. It is clear, that the Church of Rome was 
the mother of this corruption; and I wish I could say that 
the Reformation had reduced our Liturgy to the primitive 
state in this particular." ! 
We now must briefly note the witness of the Nonjurors 
themselves. Bishop George Hickes (1642-1715), in the 
course of a comment on Romans xv. 15, 16, says: “I 
think that in mentioning that offering of his as being 
sanctified by the Holy Ghost, he plainly alludes to the 
ministration of the Christian sacrifice, in which they 
solemnly prayed unto God ‘to send down His Holy Spirit 
upon the oblations’; without whom being specially pres- 
ent S. Cyprian thought the bread and wine could not be 
sanctified into the body and blood of Christ. . . . The 
ancient Church thought the Holy Spirit to be most espe- 


vJohnson"s Works, A.C.L., Vol., II. pp. 209-210. 


214 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


cially present at the Eucharistical sacrifice, and to be the 
chief agent in the ministration of it; who as Maximus 
and Cabasilas both express themselves, ‘sanctifies the gifts 
by the hand and tongue of the priest. The Holy Ghost 
then is the principal, and the priests but the instrumental 
ministers in the ministration of the Eucharistical obla- 
tion, σύνεργοι τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, co-agents or workers “ 
together with the Holy Spirit in the ministration of it. . . . 
From all that I have said, or cited out of the solemn 
prayers which were made to God in the administration of 
the Eucharist to send down His Holy Spirit upon the priest, 
the sacrifice, and the people, and from His mighty most 
special assistance, and chief ministration in the holy ac- 
tion, particularly in the sanctifying the oblations, I say, 
I cannot from considering all this but think it very prob- 
able, that the Apostle alluded to the common notion 
the Christians had of the Eucharistical oblations being 
sanctified by the Holy Ghost, in saying that the obla- 
tion he made of the Gentiles was acceptable to God, 
being (like the Eucharistical bread and wine) sanctified 
by the Holy Ghost." ! 

The thorough knowledge of early Christian practice in 
the consecration of the Eucharist, possessed by such men 
as Jeremy Taylor, Thorndike, John Johnson, and by the 
Nonjuring Bishops Hickes, Brett, Collier, Deacon, Camp- 
bell, and Rattray, found full expression for itself in the 
Nonjurors’ Liturgy of 1718. This Liturgy, which was 
framed chiefly by Bishops Jeremy Collier (1650-1726) 
and Thomas Brett (1667-1743), in that part which cor- 
responds to our Prayer of Consecration, follows the 
Greek Liturgy of St. James in the Post Sanctus and the 
Liturgy of the Apostolie Constitutions in the Oblation 
and Invocation? In the course of fruitless efforts for 
reunion with the Eastern Church, during the years 1716- 


! Hickes's Treatises, A.C.L., Vol. II., pp. 96, 98, 99. 
? See Appendix, pp. 424-426. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 215 


1725, a Greek translation of this Liturgy was submitted 
to the Holy Synod of the Russian Church. In this 
Liturgy the Nonjurors gave effect to their adherence 
to Catholie antiquity on the point under consideration, 
not only by inserting an explieit Invocation of the Holy 
Spirit, but by placing it in its proper position, 1.6. after 
the Oblation.? 

The opinion of Bishop Thomas Brett is worthy of our 
attention: “If the words which our Saviour used when he 
gave thanks or blessed, or consecrated the sacred elements, 
had been recorded by the Evangelists, and so made known 
to us, they would not have been proper to have been used 
by us. For to offer a thing to be done, and to offer the 
memorial of that which is already done; to offer oneself 
to suffer, and to offer the commemoration of another 


! Sce Bishop Dowden in The Journal of Theological Studies, for 
July, 1900, Vol. I., p. 565. Cf. Lathbury’s History oj the Non- 
jurors, London, 1845, pp. 309-361. Cf. The Orthodox Church of 
the East in the Eighteenth Century, being the Correspondence between 
the Eastern Patriarchs and the Nonjuring Bishops, by the Rev. 
George Williams, London, 1868. For a brief account see The 
Nonjurors, their Lives, Principles, and Writings, by (the late) J. H. 
Overton, London, 1902, pp. 451—466. 

? It should not be forgotten that Edward Stephens, who printed, 
in 1696, The Liturgy oj the Ancients represented, as near as well 
may be, in English Forms, in which he used the Prayer of Conse- 
cration from the Scottish Book of 1637 (with a few verbal altera- 
tions), was the first to issue in English a Liturgy with the Narrative 
of Institution, the Oblation of the elements, and the Invocation 
in their proper order, thus anticipating the Liturgy of the Nonjurors 
by about a score of years. This second form, which was entitled 
A Complete Form oj Liturgy, or Divine Service, according to the Usage 
of the Most Ancient Christians, and which was put forth c. 1700, 
is the earliest practical expression of that trend of thought which 
at length established in our American Church a really primitive 
and Catholic form of Eucharistie Prayer. If ever actually used, 
it must have been confined to the small congregation who gathered 
for a brief space around its compiler, yet it is deserving of interest 
as a milestone on the road to our present Prayer of Consecration. 
See Appendix, pp. 423-424. 


216 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


person that has already suffered, can never be done with 
the same words, or exactly in the same manner; there 
must be what we call mutatis mutandis in such a case. 
We are indeed obliged to give thanks, to bless or consecrate, 
and offer as Christ did; but we cannot do it in the same 
words, if we knew what those words were, for the reasons 
here given. 

“Again, in the last place, Christ instituted a new sac- 
rament, and therefore it was proper for him to perform 
consecration in the first place, and then declare to his dis- 
ciples the reason why he had done it, and what he required 
them to do: but we are to administer a sacrament already 
instituted, and therefore ought to declare our authority 
and commission for that ministration in the first place. 
So that although our Saviour first consecrated the ele- 
ments before he spake the words, Take eat, this my body, 
etc., yet it is not proper for us to do so, because we use 
them not on the same occasion and to the same purpose 
he did: for he spake them at the very time he delivered 
the elements to his disciples, and in order to let them know 
what they then received at his hands; but we use them as 
declaration of the commission and authority by which we 
actin this ministration. . . . Now forasmuch as the holy 
Seriptures have not informed us how the Apostles did 
celebrate it, we can learn this only from tradition: and 
forasmuch as we have an universal uninterrupted tradi- 
tion, that this sacrament was consecrated by pronouncing 
the words of institution, by making an oblation of the 
elements as the representative body and blood of Christ, 
with a thankful remembrance of his death, and by a 
petition for the divine benediction, or the Holy Spirit 
to descend upon the elements, and that this recital of the 
words of institution, the oblation and invocation, follow 
each other in this order in all Liturgies used before the 
Reformation, except the Roman only, we have as good 
evidence as we have for the canon of Scripture itself, 


ΤΗΕ RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 217 


that this form and order was used and preseribed by the 
Apostles, and therefore that we ought not to deviate from 
it 

Without quoting from Bishop Brett at greater length, 
we ought to remember that he was well acquainted with 
the whole literature of the subject, and that his treatise 
amply vindicates the Liturgy of the Nonjurors in its most 
vital part, the Anaphora. Moreover, he shows the utter 
absurdity of the later Roman position, and the insin- 
cerity of any appeal to the Council of Florence in the 
attempt to prove that the Greeks ever accepted Roman 
teaching in the matter of the consecration of the 
Eucharist. 

After the most of the Nonjurors had returned to the com- 
munion of the Church of England, and the use of the Office 
of 1718 had been given up, Bishop Thomas Deacon (1697— 
1753) put forth a Liturgy * which follows very closely the 
Liturgy of the Apostolic Constitutions, almost verbatim in 
fact, in the part that corresponds to the Prayer of Con- 
secration. This was in 1734, and in 1747 he published his 
two Catechisms,“ from the shorter of which we will quote 
a brief extract. “The consecration of the Eucharist is 
thus performed: The Priest, after having placed the 
Bread and mixed Cup upon the altar, first gives God 
thanks for all his benefits and mercies conferred upon 
mankind, especially those of Creation and Redemption: 
he then recites how Jesus Christ instituted this Sacra- 
ment the night before his passion, and performs his com- 
mand by doing what he did. He takes the Bread into his 
hands, and breaks it, which broken Bread represents the 

‘In his Dissertation appended to A Collection of the Principal 
Liturgies, ete. (first published in 1720), London, 1838, pp. 231- 
232, 233. 

. 2 Ibid., pp. 236-246. 3 See Appendix, pp. 427-428. 
4A Full, True, and Comprehensive View of Christianity, etc. 
. The Whole succinctly and fully laid down in Two Cate- 
chisms, . . . London, 1747. 


218 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


dead Body of Christ pierced upon the cross. He takes the 
Cup into his hands, which Cup, consisting of Wine and 
Water, represents the Blood and Water that flowed from 
the dead body of Christ upon the eross: he then repeats 
our Saviour's powerful words over them, by which the 
Bread and Cup are made authoritative representations or 
symbols of Christ’s erucified Body and effused Blood: and 
being thus in a capacity to be offered to God, he accordingly 
makes the oblation, which is the highest and most proper 
act of Christian worship. After God has accepted of this 
Sacrifice, he is pleased to return it to us again to feast upon, 
that we may thereby partake of all the benefits of our 
Saviour’s death and passion; in order to which, the Priest 
prays to God the Father to send his Holy Spirit upon the 
Bread and Cup offered to him, that he may enliven those 
representations of Christ's dead Body and effused Blood, 
and make them his spiritual life-giving Body and Blood 
in vertue and power, that the receivers thereof may obtain 
all the blessings of the institution." ! 

Bishop Thomas Rattray (1687-1743) prepared a critical 
edition of the Liturgy of S. James? which was published 
the year after his death. In an appendix he gave a 
translation of his “corrected” text of the Anaphora of S. 
James, with rubries added and a form of offertory cere- 
monial prefixed.? While this Liturgy differed too much 
from those with which the Scottish clergy were familiar, 
for it to obtain general acceptance, it appears to have 
been used after Bishop Rattray’s death at Craighall 

ı A Full, True, and Comprehensive View cf Christianity, etc. 
... The Whole succinctly and fully laid down in Two Catechisms, 
. . . London, 1747, pp. 75-76. Cf. pp. 26-27; and (the Longer 
Catechism) pp. 131-132, 293-296, especially pp. 322-334. 

? The Ancient Liturgy of the Church of Jerusalem, ete., London, 
1744. Cf. the Preface, pp. xii., xiii.; the foot-notes, pp. 15, 17, 19, 
21, 23, 25, 27, 42, 43: for his opinion as to Eucharistie consecra- 


tion. 
3 Ibid., pp. 111-122. See Appendix, pp. 428-430. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 219 


(Perthshire), if not elsewhere. The influence of Bishop 
Rattray’s Liturgy was very strong in determining the 
settlement of the Scottish Liturgy in 1764 on primitive 
lines so far as the consecration of the Eucharist was con- 
cerned. As his teaching upon the Eucharist coincides 
entirely with that of Bishop Deacon, it is not necessary 
to quote from his works. 

Bishop Archibald Campbell (f 1744), in An Essay 
upon the Holy Eucharist,’ says: “ A true Bishop or Priest, 
rightly and duly Ordained, and who is neither Heretick 
nor Schismatick doth repeat the Words of Institution, over, 
the Offered Symbols of Bread and Wine, mixed with 
Water, to shew that he hath Authority and a Commis- 
sion from CHRIST to Execute this Great, Tremendous, 
Mysterious and most Solemn Office and Administration, 
and that in Obedience to the Command.of CHRIST, who 
when He [nstituted this His Last Supper, said τοῦτο ποιεῖτε, 
do as I have done St. Luke xxii. 19. . . . These Sacred 
Symbols are then offered up by Him who Officiates, to 
Gop the FATHER, that He may send His HoLy SPIRIT, 
to Operate in such manner upon this Sacrifice, that it may 
become unto the Receivers verily and indeed the most 
Precious Energetical Spiritual Body and Blood of CHRIST, 
for all the Purposes of the Divine Institution." + And 
again, “Under the Gospel, when the Bishop or Priest 
hath received the Peoples Offered Materials for the 
Christian Sacrifice and has made a Priestly Oblation οἳ 
them, they are then prepared to be made a Sacrifice, 
and then the Priest pronounceth the Words of Institution 
over them, and imitateth the Actions of our Blessed 
LORD, by which the Priests Power to Consecrate by 
Commission, is shewed, and the sacred Symbols become 


1 See Bishop Dowden's Annotated Scottish Communion Office, 
p. 92 and note 2. 2 Ibid., pp. 336-338. 

3 Appended to The Doctrine of a Middle State . . . London, 
1721, pp. 285-319. 4 Ibid., p. 306. 


220 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Consecrated, as far as in the Power of Man to do, by Com- 
mission: And then they are fit to be Offered up to GOD, 
by the Priest, in Sacrifice for all the purposes of the 
Institution, and they are accordingly Offered up in Sacri- 
fice to GOD the FATHER, as Commemorative of, and in 
Union with the One Great Sacrifice, once Offered, by 
JESUS Curist of Himself upon the Cross. And this is 
the proper Oblation and Sacrifice, which may be called the 
Third Oblation, for the other two are neither of them a 
Sacrifice, but this Third Oblation is a Sacrifice, and in the 
Primitive Liturgies, is so called at this period of the Ser- 
vice and not before, and by the Concomitant Sacrificial 
Prayer the Priest begs of Gop the FATHER, that He would 
please to do, what none but He can do, to send down the 
Hory GHosT upon the Offered Sacrifice, that the sacred, 
and now in part Consecrated Symbols, may, by His effectual 
Operation, became Verily, and Indeed, the Most Precious 
Body and Blood of CHRIST, to the Receivers. . . . 

“ And therefore although the sacred Symbols are duly 
Sacrificed, and that the Act is justly called a Sacrifice, 
and that the pronouncing the Words of Institution over 
them, and the imitating the Actions of CHRIST, at the 
Institution doth in so far Consecrate them, that they are 
then fit to be Offered up in Sacrifice to GOD, yet unless 
the HOLY GHOST descend upon them, which only GOD 
can do, and therefore ought to be prayed to do, it is 
but a Vain Oblation and Sacrifice, and of no Energy or 
Advantage to the Receiver, for it is, as without Life, until 
the presumed Descent of the HOLY GHOST upon it by 
whose effectual Operation only, it becomes Verily, and 
Indeed, the Most Precious Body and Blood of CHRIST to 
the Receivers.” 1 

It would be most interesting to enlarge upon the cita- 
tions already made, in order to illustrate the spirit of 


! An Essay upon the Holy Eucharist appended to The Doctrine of 
a Middle State . . . London, 1721, pp. 307-308. Cf. also the 
Preface, pp. vii., ix.-x.; and p. 79. 


ΤΗΕ RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 221 


earnest devotion to primitive truth in the persecuted 
Church in Scotland, that finally decided the form of the 
Scottish Liturgy in 1764. Bishop Dowden has done 
this so fully in his Annotated Scottish Communion Ofice,! 
that it is as unnecessary, as it would be impertinent, to 
attempt to go over the ground again. Let one guotation 
suffice from a Catechism? prepared by Bishop Robert 
Forbes, who, with Bishop W. Falconer, was chiefly instru- 
mental in establishing the text of the Scottish Communion 
Office in the above-mentioned year. 

“Ὁ. By what power is this wonderful change made upon 
these weak Elements of Bread and Wine? 

“A. "Tiscertain (as I have already said) from the Words 
of Institution, that Christ did make the Elements to be his 
Body and Blood, for he expressly tells us they are so: 
But no power inferiour to his own could make them so. 
As therefore the Holy Ghost is his Divine Substitute upon 
earth, by which he is present with his Church unto the 
end of the world, so whatever operations he now performs 
in his Church are wrought by that Divine Spirit. There- 
fore, that the Bread and Wine may become his Body and 
Blood, though not in Substance, yet in Power, Virtue, 
and Efject, it is necessary that this Holy Spirit should 
bless and sanctify them, and work in them and with them; 
because, as St John says (Chap. 6th, ver. 63rd), He is 
the Spirit that quickneth. Hence it is, that in the ex- 
cellent Communion Office, authorized by King Charles the 
First, which we use, we have in the Prayer of Consecration 
a particular petition for the operation of the Holy Ghost, 
to make the Elements the Body and Blood of Christ." ? 


1 Q.v., pp. 1-107. 

* A Catechism dealing chiefly with the Holy Eucharist, by Robert 
Forbes, A.M. . . . Edited from the original MSS. for the Scottish 
Clergy Society, by John Dowden, D.D., Bishop of Edinburgh, 
Edinburgh, 1904. 

* Ibid., pp. 10-11. Cf. pp. 12-18. 


222 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


It now remains for us briefly to relate the handing on 
to the American Church, of the Nonjuring tradition of 
adherence to early practice in the consecration of the 
Eucharist, through the mediation of Bishop Seabury 
(1729-1796). In going to Edinburgh in 1752 to study at 
the University, preparatory to receiving Holy Orders, the 
future Bishop was brought in contact with the perse- 
cuted Church in Scotland at the time when the Scottish 
Communion Office was being moulded into its present form, 
as the result of the honest researches of English and Non- 
juring theologians since the Reformation.‘ When thirty 
years later he returned to Scotland and finally received 
episcopal consecration on the 14th of November, 1784, in 
the little chapel in Long-acre, Aberdeen, at the hands of 
Bishop Kilgour (Primus), Bishop Petrie, and Bishop J. 
Skinner, he was by no means a stranger to the Scottish 
usage in the consecration of the Eucharist. In his stu- 
dent days he had come into close touch with the Catholie 
remainder of the ancient Church of Scotland, and had 
known the depth of her feeling in respect of the Eucha- 
ristic service, for which she had endured every privation. 
There was therefore nothing hasty in his signing, on the 
day after his consecration, a Concordate with his Scot- 
tish consecrators, of which the fifth Article is as follows: — 

“Art V. As the Celebration of the holy Eucharist, or 
the Administration of the Sacrament of the Body and 
Blood of Christ, is the principal Bond of Union among 
Christians, as well as the most solemn Act of Worship 
in the Christian Church, the Bishops aforesaid agree In 
desiring that there may be as little Variance here as pos- 
sible. And tho" the Scottish Bishops are very far from 
prescribing to their Brethren in this matter, they eannot 
help ardently wishing that Bishop Seabury would endea- 


1 Life and Correspondence of the Right Reverend Samuel Sea- 
bury, D.D., .. . by E. Edwards Beardsley, D.D., LL.D., Boston, 
1881, p. 7, note 2. 


ΤΗΕ RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 223 


vour all he can, consistently with peace and prudence, 
to make the Celebration of this venerable Mystery con- 
formable to the most primitive Doctrine and Practice 
in that respeet: Which is the Pattern the Church of Scot- 
land has copied after in her Communion Office, and 
which it has been the Wish of some of the most eminent 
Divines of the Church of England, that she also had more 
closely followed, than she seems to have done since she gave 
up her first reformed Liturgy, used in the Reign of King 
Edward VI., between which, and the form used "in the 
Church of Scotland, there is no Difference in any point, 
which the primitive Church reckoned essential to the right 
Ministration of the holy Eucharist. In this capital 
Article therefore of the Eucharistie Service, in which the 
Scottish Bishops so earnestly wish for as much Unity as 
possible, Bishop Seabury also agrees to take a serious 
View of the Communion Office recommended by them, and 
if found agreeable to the genuine Standards of Antiquity, 
to give his Sanction to it, and by gentle Methods of Argu- 
ment and Persuasion, to endeavour, as they have done, 
to introduce it by degrees into practice, without the 
Compulsion of Authority on the one side, or the prejudice 
of former Custom on the other." ! 

About six months after his return to America, Bishop 
Seabury received a letter congratulating him upon his 
consecration, from the Rev. William Smith? at that time 

! Beardsley, op. cit., p. 152. 

? Mr. Smith was a Scotsman, and possessed Scottish Orders. 
His first charge in America was Trinity Church, Oxford, together 
with All Saints, Pequestan (afterward Lower Dublin), both par- 
ishes then near (but now included within the limits of) the city 
of Philadelphia. He remained there from January 1, 1785, until 
his appointment to Stepney, Maryland, in the fall of the same 
year. On July, 7, 1787, he became Rector of St. Paul's, Narra- 
gansett, R.I., and on January 28, 1790, Rector of Trinity Church, 
Newport R.I., and, as appears from Bishop Seabury's defence of 
him (see below, p. 234), was foremost in using the American Prayer 
of Consecration. 


224 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Rector of Stepney Parish, Maryland, from which a few 
quotations willnow be made. 

*, .. Understanding that there were certain terms 
of Communion and a Concordate agreed upon and signed, 
by your Reverence and Consecrators, with so much the 
more freedom do I (tho’ personally unknown yet I pre- 
sume you may have heard some of these Bishops make 
mention of me) do I address you on a point of Episcopal 
practice among the Scotch Clergy, with regard to their 
manner of administering the Holy Eucharist. The 
Consecration Prayer, I allude to and the Form of Bene- 
dietion with which the Elements are distributed. You 
know the Consecration prayer in the Scotch Communion 
Office is more full and complete, than the Parallel prayer 
in the English Communion Office, as it presently exists in 
its mutilated state; tho' the Consecration prayer of both 
was the same or very nearly so till Queen Elizabeth’s 
time! that the lat[t]er cut off the Oblation and Invocation 
parts of said prayer, while the former retained them, and 
does so— and will do so, I may say to the end. This prayer 
I have used ever since I came to America — both at the 
Churches of All Saints and Oxford near Philadelphia, and 
since my appointment in Stepney parish in the State of 
Maryland, without hearing any one to find fault with 1t — 
At my settlement here I shewed the Vestry the Scotch 
Communion Office, and in particular the Consecration 
prayer, and wherein it exceeded the English Form, to 
the use of this prayer all were unanimous. — But Dr. 
Smith a few weeks ago wrote me, expressing his desire that 
I should eonform to the English practice: — to the doctor 
I made a Return setting forth my reasons for using the 


! This rather remarkable reference of the changes made in the 
Prayer of Consecration in the Book of 1549, to Queen Elizabeth’s 
time is not easy of explanation, unless we suppose Mr. Smith to 
ignore the short-lived Book of 1552 (which lacked the approval 
of Convocation), and hence to date the mutilated Prayer of Con- 
secration from its re-issue in 1559. 


* 


ΤΗΕ RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 225 


Scotch form, which was used in the English Church till 
Queen Elizabeth"s time:! that as that prayer symbolized 
in all points with the primitive practice, of repeating Ist 
the words of our Blessed Lord’s Institution, 2d the Oblation 
and 3d the Invocation— and the other does not, I could not 
so far depart from the Apostolie practice, as to adopt the 
use of a prayer which manifestly is abridged and mutilated. 
If it has not been mutilated, which we know it has, or if 
it has assertors who call it a perfect and complete prayer 
wanting nothing — may I not ask, how does it conelude 
in contradiction to St. Paul’s Rule, of coneluding all our 
Addresses to Heaven in and thro’ Our Lord Jesus Christ ? 
. . . As to the Repeating solely the Words of the Holy 
Institution of the Blessed Eucharist — as consecratory of 
the Elements, without any concomitant prayer; the whole 
Tide of primitive practice is different — for all the Churches 
used the Oblation and Invocation; and the Roman was 
the first Church that placed the whole of the Consecra- 
tion in repeating the words of Institution. . . . 

“ Had I been able to have attended the Convention of this 
State at Baltimore it is likely my practice would have been 
called in question. . . . I am ready to stand for the Truth 
and Primitive practice, and stand in awe of handling the 
word of God deceitfully. If my Brethren here chose to 
condemn me for adhering to the faith delivered to the 
Saints, I shall find no fault with their adherence to what 
they judge best, tho' I own I could wish that in these days 
of enquiry they would enquire whether these things are 
so or not. I should esteem it a favour, to be informed 
by your Reverence, how this Affair stands betwixt you 
and your Consecrators — and as I well know the point 
of view, the Scotch Bishops see the English Consecration 
prayer in, I am very much led to think that perhaps it 
may be One of the Terms of the Concordate, that Your 
Reverence and those You ordain shall use the Scotch 


‘ See note on opposite page. 


226 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Communion Office, if not all of it, at least the Consecration 
prayer. I hope your Reverence will not deem me over- 
zealous for this prayer and Office, — and the practice of 
Antiquity — the practice too of that Church whose Ordi- 
nation I bear — not only so, but whose Consecration the 
first. Bishop in America bears. . . ." 

This letter? was written from Eden Academy, Somerset 
County, Maryland, Nov. 5, 1785, and is endorsed in 
Bishop Seabury's handwriting as having been received 
December 8, and answered December 12, 1785. Bishop 
Seabury's answer is not known to be in existence at pres- 
ent, but it 1s evident from his subsequent course of action, 
that this letter of Mr. Smith's must have been a source 
of encouragement to him in his endeavours to put into 
operation the terms of the Concordate with his Scottish 
consecrators. For Mr. Smith's letter is evidence not only 
of his own warm personal adherence to the Scottish form 
of Consecration, but also of ἃ somewhat extended appre- 
ciation of its superiority to the English form, upon the 
part of the laity in Pennsylvania and Maryland. More- 
over, it would seem that the defence which he made in his 
“ Return setting forth" his “ reasons for using the Scotch 
form," in reply to Dr. Smith's remonstrance, was not with- 
out its effect upon the latter; if we may judge from Dr. 
Smith's letters to Dr. White and to Mr. Parker in report- 


! That Mr. Smith's own practice became in due time the rule for 
the American Church, is one of the most interesting facts of history. 
Although Bishop Seabury, in his own Communion Office, followed 
the order and arrangement of the Scottish Office of 1764, it was the 
English Communion Office with the replacement of its Prayer of 
Consecration by the Scottish form that became the distinctive 
American rite. 

2 The extracts from this letter given in the text are reproduced 
verbatim from the original MS. in the possession of the Rev. W. 
J. Seabury, D.D. (great-grandson of Bishop Seabury), through 
whose kindness and assistance the transcription was made and 
compared. Contractions have been expanded, but no alteration 
has been made. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 227 


ing the amendment to the English Prayer of Consecration 
proposed by the Maryland Convention of 1786, and from 
the fact that in the General Convention of 1789, Dr. 
Smith, then President of the House of Deputies, so heartily 
and effectively championed? the adoption of the present 
American Prayer of Consecration. It is at least note- 
worthy, that so early as the beginning of 1785, the chief 
“alteration and amendment" made in the English Book 
of Common Prayer in 1789 was anticipated by Mr. 
Smith’s habitual substitution of the Scottish Prayer of 
Consecration for the meagre English form, leaving the 
order and arrangement of the English Communion Office 
intact. 

We are not surprised, then, that Bishop Seabury in his 
Second Charge to the Clergy of his Diocese, delivered 
at Derby, Connecticut, on the 22d of September, 1786, 
says in speaking of the Holy Communion: “They [the 
primitive Christians] called and esteemed it to be the 
Christian Sacrifice, commemorative of the great sacrifice 
of atonement which Christ had made for the sins of the 
whole world; wherein, under the symbols of bread and the 
cup, the body and blood of Christ which he offered up, 
and which were broken and shed upon the cross, are 
figured forth; and being presented to God our heavenly 
Father, by his Priest here on earth, the merits of Christ 
for the remission of sins are pleaded by him, and we trust 
by our great High Priest himself in heaven: And being 
sanctified by prayer, thanksgiving, the words of institu- 
tion, and the invocation of the Holy Spirit, are divided 
among the Communicants as a Feast upon the Sacrifice." ? 
At this same time he set forth for use in his own 
Diocese a Communion Office which is the Scottish Office 
of 1764 with but a few verbal alterations, and these of 


1 See below, pp. 235-237, and Appendix, pp. 434-435. 
2 See below, p. 229 and note 3. 
3 Beardsley, op. cit., pp. 280-281. Cf. ibid., pp. 274-276. 


228 THE ΟΟΝΡΕΟΒΑΤΙΟΝ OF THE EUCHARIST 


but minor importance. The clergy of Connecticut, be- 
came very strongly attached to this Communion Office, 
and it was used even after the adoption of the American 
Prayer Book, at least in some places, as late as 1819. 
Consistently with his belief, with the Concordate, and with 
the Office he had put forth in accordance therewith, we 
find Bishop Seabury writing to Bishop White, under date 
of the 29th June, 1789, as follows: “That the most ex- 
ceptionable part of the English book is the Communion 
Office may be proved by a number of very respectable 
names among her clergy. The grand fault in that office 
is the deficiency of a more formal oblation of the ele- 
ments, and of the invocation of the Holy Ghost to sanctify 
and bless them. The Consecration is made to consist 
merely in the Priest's laying his hands on the elements 
and pronouncing ‘This is my body,’ etc., which words are 
not consecration at all, nor were they addressed by 
Christ to the Father, but were declarative to the Apostles. 
This is so exactly symbolizing with the Church of Rome 
in an error; an error, too, on which the absurdity of 
Transubstantiation is built, that nothing but having fallen 
into the same error themselves could have prevented the 
enemies of the Church from casting it in her teeth. "The 
efficacy of Baptism, of Confirmation, of Orders, is ascribed 
to the Holy Ghost, and His energy is implored for that 
purpose; and why he should not be invoked in the con- 
secration of the Eucharist, especially as all the old Liturgies 
are full to the point, I cannot conceive. It is much easier 
to account for the alterations of the first Liturgy of Edward 
VI., than to justify them; and as I have been told there is 
a vote on the minutes of your Convention, anno 1786, I 

1 See Professor Harťs edition of Bishop Seabury’s Communion 
Office (second edition, revised), New York, 1883, pp. 36-38; and 
Bishop Dowden's Annotated Scottish Communion Office, pp. 290- 
202. 

? Beardsley, op. cit., pp. 263-264, andnote 1. Cf.Professor Hart’s 
edition of Bishop Seabury's Communion Office, already cited, p. 52. 


THE RESTORATION OF ΤΗΕ EPIKLESIS 229 


believe, for the revision of this matter, I hope it will 
be taken up, and that God will raise up some able and 
worthy advocate for this primitive practice, and make you 
and the Convention the instruments of restoring it to 
His Church in America. It would do you more honour in 
the world and contribute more to the union of the Churches 
than any other alterations you can make, and would 
restore the Holy Eucharist to its ancient dignity and 
efficacy."! This letter was laid before the General 
Convention of 1789 on the 30th of July? The Convention 
adjourned from the 8th of August until the 29th of Sep- 
tember, and during this last session, on the 14th of October, 
the present American Prayer of Consecration was adopted, 
owing primarily to the strong influence of Bishop Seabury. 
Of this change Bishop White speaks thus: “In the service 
for the administration of the communion, it may perhaps 
be expected, that the great change made, in restoring to 
the consecration prayer the oblatory words and the 
invocation of the Holy Spirit, left out in King Edward’s 
reign, must at least have produced an opposition. But 
no such thing happened to any considerable extent, 
or at least the author did not hear of any in the other 
house, further than a disposition to the effeet in a few 
gentlemen, which was counteracted by some pertinent 
remarks of the president.” In that of the Bishops, it lay 


! Journals of General Conventions of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church in the United States, 1785-1835. Edited by William Stevens 
Perry, D.D., three vols., Claremont, N.H., 1874; Vol. III., Histor- 
ical Notes and Documents, pp. 387-388. 

AIDA. Vol, E, p. 71. 

* The Rev. William Smith, D.D. Cf. the following account from 
his biography :— 

“ Bishops Seabury and White constituted the House of Bishops 
when our present Communion Office was about to be proposed to 
The House of Deputies for their adoption. The two Bishops pre- 
ferred the Scotch Communion Service to the English, and after 
they had sent it to the House of Deputies felt anxious and timid 


230 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


very near to the heart of Bishop Seabury. . . . Bishop 
Seabury "s attachment to these changes may be learned 
from the following incident. On the morning of the 
Sunday which occurred during the session of the conven- 
tion, the author wished him to consecrate the elements. 
This he declined. On the offer being again made at the 
time when the service was to begin, he still declined, and, 
smiling, added — To confess the truth, I hardly consider 
the form to be used, as strietly amounting to a consecra- 
tion. The form was of course that used heretofore: the 
changes not having taken effect." ! 

By this act, Bishop Seabury strikingly manifested his 
convietion of the great superiority of the Scottish and 


about the result. . . . The Bishops sent for Dr. Smith, then Presi- 
dent of the House of Deputies, for a private conference. They 
frankly admitted that they had gone to the Scotch Communion 
Office for a material portion of their labors. Butas Dr. Smith was 
a born Scotchman, this was a compliment to his country, which sub- 
dued his prejudices, if he had any. He agreed to introduce the 
new office to the House of Deputies and recommend it for adop- 
tion. The next day he informed the House of the document in- 
trusted to him, and of its variations from the better known office 
of the Church of England. A storm began to brew, and hoarse 
whispers about popery reached his ears. He rose in his place, and, 
exclaiming, ‘Hear — [pronouncing it Heyre] — before ye judge,’ 
began to read. Dr. Smith was a superb reader and withal had 
just enough of a Scotch brogue to make his tones more musical and 
his emphasis more thrilling. He soon caught attention, and read 
his paper through without a single interruption, his hearers becom- 
ing more and more absorbed and charmed. When he had finished, 
the new office was accepted with acelamations. Wherefore, if 
there is anything in our Communion Office which Churchmen of 
the present day delight in, not to say glory in, they should hold the 
memory of Dr. William Smith in cherished admiration." Life and 
Correspondence of the Rev. William Smith, D.D., by his great- 
grandson, Horace Wemyss Smith, two vols., Philadelphia, 1880, 
Vol. II., pp. 290-291. 

‘Memoirs of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United 
States of America . . . bythe Right Reverend William White, D.D., 
edited with notes . . . by the Rev. B. F. DeCosta, New York, 
1880, pp. 178-180. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 231 


American form over the English. At the same time 
he did not deny the validity of the English form, for though 
refusing to consecrate by it, he did not hesitäte to receive 
the elements as consecrated by it.! 

Bishop Seabury had thus accomplished the desire of his 
heart and had knitted all the closer the willing bands of 
the Concordate he had signed the day after his consecration 
to the Episcopate. In the Liturgy of the infant Church 
of America he had succeeded in planting an Apostolic and 
Catholie Prayer of Consecration, differing in but a single 
phrase from that of his own Communion Office and of the 
Mother Church of Scotland. This slight change did not 
affect the rationale of the Prayer, it was but the substitu- 
tion of a periphrastic expression for one more direct 
(with a view of avoiding an apparent savour of trans- 
substantiation), in the concluding part of The Invocation? 
The Scottish and American forms begin alike: “ And we 
most humbly beseech thee, O merciful Father, to hear us; 
and of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe to bless and 
sanctify, with thy Word and Holy Spirit, these thy gifts 
and ereatures of bread and wine;" — and then while the 
Scottish form expresses the purpose of this high blessing 
asked upon the simple elements of bread and wine, thus: 
“ that they may become the body and blood of thy most 
dearly beloved Son," — the American form phrases the 
purpose in this manner: “that we, receiving them accord- 
ing to thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy institution, 
in remembrance of his death and passion, may be par- 
takers of his most blessed Body and Blood." No higher 
dignity (or consecration) could be impetrated of God for 
the bread and wine than that, as the result of their being 
blessed and sanctified by God's Word and Holy Spirit, 
the reception of the elements thus consecrated should be 


! Cf. an original letter of the Rev. William Jones Seabury, D.D., 
to the Rev. W. F. Brand, D.D., quoted in the Appendix, pp. 430-434. 
? See below, pp. 236-237. 


232 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


equated with the reception of the Body and Blood of 
Christ. It would have been an easy matter, merely to have 
taken the form suggested by the Maryland and the Penn- 
sylvania Conventions of 1786,' 1.6. to insert a phrase 
of blessing into the weak English Invocation and to 
leave the rest untouched, including the English rubric 
for a second consecration. This at best would have been 
but a sorry compromise, better than no improvement. 
at all in that most unsatisfactory of Eucharistie Prayers, 
yet far removed from the glory of the Scottish form, and 
from the unity of the Spirit in the undivided Church. 
The General Convention of 1789 made an “alteration and 
amendment" of supreme importance, and in the direction 
of the restoration of the impaired unity of Christ’s Holy 
Catholic Church, by adopting the Scottish ? in preference 


1 See below, pp. 235-238, and Appendix, pp. 434-436. Cf. 
Table III., 6, p. 15. 

? The following words may well be quoted here as furnishing an 
instance of the fact that T'he Invocation in our American Prayer 
of Consecration was traditionally regarded, in the middle of the 
last century, in Scotland, as equivalent to the Scottish form. 

“It seems to afford no inconsiderable testimony to the purity 
and soundness of the Eucharistie Office of our Church, that so 
recently as the year 1785 [a misprint for 1789], and with all the 
light which learning has shed on this subject, and with the tendency 
philosophy has to introduce latitudinarian views in every matter 
in religion which savours of the mysterious, the Prayer of Consecra- 
tion in our Office has been adopted by the Protestant Episcopal 
Church of America. It has been faithfully copied in its three por- 
tions, — first, there is the recitation of the words of Institution, 
then the Oblation, and then follows the Invocation in these words :— 
*And we most humbly beseech Thee, O merciful Father, to 
hear us; and of thy Almighty goodness vouchsafe to bless and 
sanctify with thy Word and Holy Spirit these thy gifts and crea- 
tures of bread and wine" and then, instead of what follows in the 
Scottish Office — ‘that they may become the Body and Blood of 
Thy most dearly beloved Son, it is changed into — 'that we 
receiving them, according to thy Son, our Saviour, Jesus Christ's 
holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may 
be partakers of His most blessed Body. and Blood. Here the 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 233 


to the English form of Eucharistie consecration; and 
then safeguarded this change by adopting along with it 
the Scottish rubric for a second consecration ! (with the 
slight verbal difference reguired by the variation of the 
concluding clause of The Invocation), thus making assur- 
ance doubly sure that the Scottish heritage in our Prayer 
of Consecration be impossible of alienation. Moreover 
that the passing of a hundred years had not dimmed 
the Church’s appreciation of this heritage is seen in the 
rubric inserted in 1892 directing as an irreducible minimum 
in consecrating the sacrament for the Communion of the 
Sick, the same * form" ? as that prescribed in the rubric 
for the consecration of more elements if those previously 
consecrated do not suffice. The slight change made in 
The Invocation in 1789 was entirely satisfactory to any 
theologian in touch with the doctrinal and liturgical 


doctrine is still the same as is indicated in our Office. It is the 
Holy Spirit which sanctifies the bread and wine, and He is solemnly 
invoked to perform this spiritual operation upon them, which 
enables those who receive with due preparation of heart and life, 
to be partakers of the Body and Blood of our Lord; equivalent, 
as it must appear, to what we mean when we pray the Almighty 
to sanctify with the Holy Spirit these elements, that they may be- 
come the Body and Blood, so that whoever rightfully receives is 
a partaker of his most blessed Body and Blood. The one looks 
onward to the final result, while the other rests on the step which 
leads to it; for they must be in some sense the Body and Blood, 
before we can, by receiving them, be said to be partakers of these. 
Such, then, is the Consecration Prayer in the American Liturgy; 
and it affords a fuller assent to the value of ours, that in all other 
parts of the Office the form of the English Ritual has been adopted, 
and here only the preference has been given to ours, as more dis- 
tinetly conveying the true character of the Rite according to the 
teaching of the Apostles, evinced by the Formularies introduced 
by them into the churches they planted." 

Address to the Members of the Episcopal Church in Scotland. 
By a Layman. London: J. Lendrum, 7, Warwick Square; Edin- 
burgh: R. Grant and Son; Aberdeen: W. Spark, 1846, pp. 46-47. 

! See Table IV., 6, p. 17. 

? American Standard Book of Common Prayer (1892), p. 293. 


234 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


traditions and standards of the Nonjurors. To Bishop 
Seabury there could be no essential difference between 
the form of The Invocation in the Scottish Prayer of 
Consecration and that adopted in Philadelphia, Octo- 
ber 14, 1789; one would be equally as acceptable to him 
as the other. We find him writing under date of Feb- 
ruary 24, 1790, “With regard to the prayer which Mr. 
Smith uses at the Consecration of the Eucharist, I use the 
same myself,and after October next it will be used through- 
out the United States. Nor can I see why the warmest 
friend of the Church of England should object to it. 
I have no wish to depreciate the Church of England. She 
has, I believe, few faults — but the prayer of Consecration. 
in her Communion office is deficient, even in the opinion 
of her ablest vindicators. I shall mention but one de- 
ficiency in her Consecration prayer, viz. that it is not put 
up to the Almighty Father through the Mediation of 
Jesus Christ. I could mention more, but I had rather 
conceal than expose even the appearance of a blemish 
in ἃ Church which I love and honor, and of which I pro- 
fess myself a member. The prayer Mr. Smith? uses is 
nearly the same with that in Edward VI.'s Prayer Book, 
composed by Cranmer, Ridley, ete., which was altered to 
its present form to please the Presbyterians of Geneva, 
Germany, and England, who gave encouragement that 
they would come into the Church on that ground: but 
were not as good as their word. I do not speak by guess 
when I say that a great number of the Clergy and Laity 
in England would rejoice to have the same prayer, which 
you complain of, in the English book; and whenever 
it shall. please God that they shall have another reform 
of the Prayer Book, it will most certainly take place." 

! Cf. Bishop Seabury's letter to Bishop White, pp. 228-229. 

? See above, p. 223, and note 2. It is not likely that Mr. Smith 
would have adopted the use of the American Prayer of Consecra- 


tion, before its use became compulsory, if he had not believed it to 
be equivalent to the Scottish form. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 235 


Bishop Seabury could not have written in this manner 
if he had not considered the Prayer of Consecration in 
the American Book which was to go into general use 
October 1, 1790, the equivalent of that which he had set 
forth for his diocese in 1786, after the Scottish and prim- 
itive model. Let any sober-minded person read this 
letter side by side with the letter Bishop Seabury wrote 
to Bishop White June 29, 1789,! and they will see that 
Bishop Seabury thoroughly realized that his dearest wishes 
had been fulfilled, and that thus the American Church 
had been brought into line with the early and undivided 
Church of Christ at the heart of her Eucharistie worship. 

That Bishop Seabury was so successful in his efforts 
was owing in large measure to the support given to this 
improvement by Dr. William Smith, president of the 
House of Deputies? We should also remember that there 
had already been a movement in this direction upon the 
part of two Diocesan (or State) Conventions in 1786. 
Thus in the Maryland Convention held at Annapolis, 
April 4, 1786, among the amendments to the “ Proposed 
Book" was one modifying the Prayer of Consecration as 
it stood in that, and in the English Book of Common 
Prayer. Dr. Smith, under date of April 9, writes to 
Dr. (afterward Bishop) White as follows: “ A few altera- 
tions are-proposed to be offered to the next Convention. 

An addition to the Consecration Prayer at the 
holy Sacrament, for a Blessing on the Elements, w'ch 
being only a few Words, and those extremely proper, 
and agreeable to the Practice of all other Protestant 
Churches, as well as what was in the 1st Liturgy of Edw'd 
VI. hath perfectly reconciled Mr Smith? to our Service 


! See above, pp. 228-229. 

*See Bishop White’s Memoirs, cited above, pp. 229-230. 
Cf. The Life of Dr. William Smith, Vol. II., pp. 290—291, cited 
above, p. 229, note 3. 

* See above, pp. 223-226. 


236 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


and will prevent any further Division between us and the 
numbers of Clergy coming among us from ΒΡ. S. and the 
Scots Church. 

“In the Scots and Edw’d 1st’s! Liturgy the Prayer was 
exceptionable and leaning much to Transubstantiation in 
these words — ‘ Vouchsafe to bless and sanctify these thy 
Creatures of Bread and Wine, that they may BE unto us 
the Body and Blood,’ ete. The Scots still stronger, viz. 
‘that they may BECOME unto us the Body and: Blood.’ 
. . . The Alteration as we propose it is thus, beginning 
at the words in the Consecration Prayer, ‘Hear us 0 
merciful Father, we most humbly beseech Thee, and 
vouchsafe so to bless and sanctify these thy Creatures of 
Bread and Wine that we receiving them according to 
thy Son our Saviour J. C. holy Institution, in Remem- 
brance, ete. as it now stands. This reads as well as 
before, pleases all sides, and is certainly an Improvement, 
as there was before no Invocation of a Blessing on the 
sacred Elements. When you send the Book to Mr Parker 
of Boston, before their ensuing Convention, send him as 
from me, with the Compl’ts of the Maryland Conven- 
tion, the foregoing proposed addition in the Consecration 
Prayer." 3 


! Evidently intended for “Edw’d’s 1st." 

2 Journals of General Conventions. . . . Edited by W. S. 
Perry, D.D., Vol. III., Historical Notes and Documents, pp. 190-191. 
It is interesting to compare with this proposed modification of 
the English Prayer of Consecration, a proposal made (c. 1717) by 
those Nonjurors who desired the restoration of the Invocation, to 
those of them who did not wish to depart at all from the English 
rite. As a minimum in this particular, the “ Usagers " were will- 
ing to rest content with this slight modification: “ That the Peti- 
tion in the Prayer of Consecration be always; Hear us, O Merciful 
Father, we most humbly beseech thee; Bless these thy Creatures of 
Bread and Wine: and grant that we, etc." See Brett, Dissertation 
pp. 404-407 (edition of 1838). Cf. A Vindication of the Reasons 
and Defence, etc. Part II., pp.90-91; 127. London, 1719. (This 
last was written by Bishop Jeremy Collier.) 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS BT. 


Writing not many days later, April 17, to the Rev. Mr. 
Parker of Boston, Dr. Smith repeats what he had written 
to Dr. White, almost word for word, elosing his notice of 
the subject thus: — 

“The Maryland Convention have proposed also an Ad- 
dition in the Consecration Prayer in the holy Communion, 
something analogous to that of the Liturgy of Edward 
6th and the Scots Liturgy, invoking a blessing on the Ele- 
ments of Bread and Wine, which was left out at the first 
Review of the English Liturgy, it is said, at the instance 
of Bucer, and otherwise because the Invocation favoured 
the Doctrine of T'ransubstant[iat]ion and it does now in the 
Seots Liturgy praying to bless and sanctify the Elements 
that they may become the Body and Blood, etc. We have 
proposed to retain the Prayer and yet avoid the excep- 
tionable part, and it will run thus — 

‘“‘Hear us O Merciful Father, we most humbly beseech 
Thee, and with thy Word and holy Spirit vouchsafe so to 
bless and sanctify these Thy Creatures of Bread and Wine, 
that we receiving the same, according to Thy Son our 
Saviour J. C. holy Institution, ete." 

“This I think will be a proper Amendment, and it per- 
fectly satisfies such of our Clergy and People as were 
attach’d to the Scots and other ancient Liturgies, all of 
which have an Invocation of a Blessing on the Elements 
as is indeed most reasonable and proper. 

“IT am anxious to write you by this Post to have a 
Chance of your receiving this before the Meeting of your 
Convention." ! 

The Pennsylvania Convention which met on the 22d of 
May that same year (1786) adopted the same amendment 

' ! Journals of Genl. Conv. . . . Vol. III., pp. 199—200. It is to 
be noted that in this letter Dr. Smith adds the words, “ with thy 
Word and holy Spirit." This is evidently a slip (though a pro- 
phetie one) upon his part, as may be seen by comparison with his 


letter to Dr. White, just quoted, and with the actual resolutions of 
the Convention. See Appendix, pp. 434-435. 


238 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


to the Prayer of Consecration that the Maryland Convention 
had adopted the preceding month.! It. would seem likely 
that this action was taken at the suggestion of Dr. White, 
as in writing to Dr. Smith on the 12th of April he had said 
in reference to the alterations decided upon in the Maryland 
Convention, “I think ye proposed Alterations of your 
Convention will render our Service more compleat." ? 
It was this action of the Pennsylvania Convention to which 
Bishop Seabury appealed in his letter quoted above; 
and which opened the way for the still better amendment 
proposed- by him and adopted in the General Convention 
of 1789. We are thus absolutely sure of the raison 
d’ötre of the most noteworthy of the “alterations and 
amendments" made to the English Book of Common 
Prayer. The action effecting this Improvement was taken 
by intelligent men, with their eyes wide open, with the 
deliberate intention of conforming the worship of the 
Church in America to the primitive standard in the con- 
secration of the Eucharist, that is to say, In order to 
obviate the mistaken notion of consecration by the mere 
recital of Christ's words of Declaration and Institution, 
and instead, to impetrate in The Invocation for the Divine 
blessing upon the elements before bidding the communi- 
cant receive them as the Body and Blood of Christ. 

In Bishop Seabury’s sermon “ Of the Holy Eucharist,” 4 
we have not only plain evidence of his own acceptance of 
the Scottish, Nonjuring tradition, but also the theological 
background of the Prayer of Consecration placed in the 
American Book of Common Prayer on the 14th of October, 
1789. His words are surely worth our attention, not 

! See Appendix, p. 436. Cf. Bishop Cosin’s suggested form 
of the Invocation. See above, pp. 189-190. 

? Journals of Genl. Conv., Vol. III., Historical Notes, etc., p. 191. 

3 See above, pp. 228-229. 

* Discourses on Several Subjects, by Samuel Seabury, D.D. (in 


two vols.), Hudson, 1815, Vol. I., pp. 144-162. (Reprinted from 
the edition of 1793, New York, T. and J. Swords.) 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 239 


only as those of a master in theology, but also as the utter- 
ance of one to whom, under God, the American Church 
owes so great a debt of gratitude. One quotation must 
suffice: — 

* By attending to these [the early liturgies], we shall not 
only see the order.and process of the consecration of the 
holy elements, but also the principles on which their prac- 
tice was founded. 

* At the time of the celebration, the officiating bishop, or 
priest, first gave thanks to God for all his mercies, espe- 
cially for those of creation and redemption. Then, to 
show the authority by which he acts, and his obedience 
to the command of Christ, he recites the institution of the 
holy saerament which he is celebrating, as the holy evan- 
gelists have recorded it. In doing this, he takes the bread 
into his hands and breaks it, to represent the dead body 
of Christ, torn and pierced on the cross; the cup, also, of 
wine and water mixed, representing the blood and water 
which flowed from the dead body of Christ, when wounded 
bv the soldier's spear. Over the bread and the cup he 
repeats Christ's powerful words, THIS IS MY BODY — THIS IS 
MY BLOOD. The elements being thus made authoritative 
representations, or symbols of Christ's crucified body and 
blood, are in a proper capacity to be offered to God as the 
great and acceptable sacrifice of the christian church. 
Accordingly, the oblation, which is the highest, most sol- 
emn, and proper act of Christian worship, is then imme- 
diately made. Continuing his prayer, the priest inter- 
cedes with the Almighty Father, to send upon them (the 
bread and wine) the Holy Spirit, to sanctify and bless 
them, and make the bread the body, and the cup the blood 
of Christ — his spiritual life-giving body and blood in 
power and virtue; that to all the faithful, they may be 
effectual to all spiritual purposes. . . . The Eucharist 
being as its name imports, a sacrifice of thanksgiving, 
the bread and wine, after they have been offered or given 


240 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


to God, and blessed and sanctified by his Holy Spirit, 
are returned by the hand of his minister to be eaten by the 
faithful, as a feast upon the sacrifice. . . . We communicate 
with God through Christ the Mediator, by first offering, 
or giving to him the sacred symbols of the body and blood 
of his dear Son, and then receiving them again, blessed 
and sanctified by his Holy Spirit, to feast upon at his 
table, for the refreshment of our souls." ! 

There is also interesting evidence of the fact that the 
true rationale of the Prayer of Consecration in the Ameri- 
can Communion Office was well understood and accepted 
in the early years of the nineteenth century. In an edi- 
tion of the Book of Common Prayer, published by Plow- 
man and Tanner, at Philadelphia, in 1805, we find 
prefixed An Introduction, containing Observations on the 
Services for Morning and Evening, Sundays and Holydays.? 
From the comment on “ The Prayer of Consecration” we 
may well quote as follows: “ As our Saviour himself did 
not deliver the bread and wine until he had consecrated 
them, by blessing them, and giving thanks, so the Priest is 
expected to pour out his Prayers over this mysterious 
food of our souls. Such a Prayer is the most ancient 
and essential part of the whole Communion Office. 
There are some, who believe that the part of the present 
Form, Who, in the same might, etc., was used by the 
Apostles; and it is certain. no Liturgy in the world has 
altered that particular. : 

“There was inserted in the primitive Forms, a particular 
Petition, for the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Sac- 
ramental Elements: this was in the Service of the Church 
of England, when Popish, and was continued in the first 
Liturgy of Edward VI. but was left out of the second, 


! Seabury, Discourses, Vol. I., pp. 159-160. 

>This comment is substantially taken from Wheatly. Cf. 
above, pp. 203-206. This Introduction was reprinted separately in 
1809 by Abel Dickinson, Whitehall, Philadelphia. 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 241 


and the following sentence placed in its stead, ‘Hear us, 
O merciful father, ete., ete. But in the American Liturgy, 
the invocation is restored. 

“In the Book of Common Prayer, as used by the Church 
of England, it looks, as if the Rubrie, after the form of 
Administration, was meant to imply, that the Consecra- 
tion of the Elements is made by the words of Institution 
merely. But though all Churches in the world, as has 
just been said, have in the Consecration, used the words 
of Institution, yet none before the Church of Rome, ever 
attributed the Consecration to the bare pronouneing of 
those words; that was always attributed to the eflicacy 
of the Prayer of the Church. It should be considered 
that our Saviour may have used other words; for the 
Evangelists tell us, that he gave thanks, and blessed the 
Bread and Wine, which must be performed in some words, 
that are addressed to God, and not in those addressed to 
men, as the words of Institution were. It would seem 
therefore, that the words spoken by our Saviour to his 
Disciples, could not be the whole Consecration of the 
Elements, but rather a declaration of the effect which was 
produced by the Consecration. And accordingly in the 
American Book the Rubrick abovementioned has been 
so altered as to require, that the Minister at the Consecra- 
tion of fresh Elements should repeat, not merely the words 
of Institution, but the whole of the Form of Consecration, 
from these words: All glory be to Thee, ete., to the words, 
Partakers οἱ his most blessed Body and Blood, inelusive. 

The American Church has restored the Prayer of 
Oblation to its ancient place; and has made it expressly 
refer as formerly to the Bread and Wine." ! 

We have now reached the terminus of our investigation 
of the rationale of the chief * alteration and amendment " 
introduced into the Book of Common Prayer by the 
American revisers of 1789. We have examined the Prayer 


1 Op. cit., pp. 56—57. 


242 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


of Consecration (and the accompanying rubric for a sec- 
ond consecration of elements, if those already consecrated 
are not sufficient for the communicants present), in point 
of the phraseology and of the grammatical construction 
of its parts, and have marked the patent rationale of 
Eucharistie consecration therein contained and set forth. 
We have inquired into the sequence of our Lord Christ's 
own acts and utterances upon the occasion of the original 
Institution. So doing, we observed that His act of con-: 
secration is uniformly described by the New Testament 
writers as an act of “ thanksgiving-blessing," whereby He 
set apart and hallowed the elements of bread and wine to 
be the Sacrament of His Body and Blood. Other hints 
afforded by the New Testament writings confirm this, 
and suggest the order, or plan, appropriate for the Church 
to use in her observance of the Christian “sacrifice of 
praise and thanksgiving.” By reason of Christ's word of 
command, through the means of prayer, has the Church 
consecrated her Eucharist from the very beginning. 
Obedient to her Master's bidding, ** Do this for My memo- 
rial," the Church has ever offered up high praise and 
hearty thanks to God for all the blessings vouchsafed in 
creation and redemption, and for the Institution of the 
Eucharistie memorial of His unique sacrifice, repeating 
the Narrative of that Institution as the Warrant for her 
observance of the Christian sacrifice. Then solemn and 
humble prayer has she ever made to the Father of all, for 
His acceptance of the memorial gifts of bread and wine 
presented before His Divine Majesty, and for the hallow- 
ing of them by the Holy Spirit to be the communion of 
Christ's most blessed Body and Blood. The witness of 
the early Christian writers, the witness of the great army 
of the Fathers, the witness of the Liturgies actually used 
in the ancient and undivided Church, agree in one. Unto 
this day, moreover, we have found that the Churches of 
the East (heterodox as well as orthodox) preserve un- 


THE RESTORATION OF THE EPIKLESIS 243 


broken this primitive tradition of Eucharistic consecra- 
tion. Rome and the Churches that paid obedience to 
her, alone wandered from the unity of Christendom in this 
particular. After the schism of East and West, forgetting 
the older tradition, growing ignorant of the Fathers, 
under the guidance of a materialized notion of the Eucha- 
ristic Presence, Rome slowly evolved a new and unprimi- 
tive theory of consecration, which dominated the thought 
of the West until the Reformation. The gradual slough- 
ing off of this error, and the recovery of the truly Catholic 
rationale of Eucharistie consecration, within the Anglican 
Communion, we have traced briefly; from the first symp- 
tom of better things in the First Book of King Edward 
VI., through the pages of some fairly representative Eng- 
lish theologians (not forgetting the noble and learned Non- 
jurors), to the full and accurate reéstablishment of the 
ancient Catholie tradition by the persecuted Scottish 
Church in 1764, and by the American Church in 1789. 

We may, therefore, thus sum up our study of the Prayer 
of Consecration in the American Liturgy. It has a natu- 
ral and obvious rationale and significance; it follows 
strietly the analogy of Christ's own Institution, in obe- 
dience to His command, “‘ Do this": it is in absolute accord 
with early patristic teaching, both Eastern and Western; 
it is in perfect harmony with the norm of the primitive 
liturgical tradition, with the unaltered usage of the East- 
ern Church until to-day, and of the Western Church 
until after the eleventh century; and it stands before us 
as the finished work of the English Reformation, in the 
matter of the consecration of the Eucharist. It is an in- 
heritance of which we may be justly proud, and it will 
some day prove a most important factor in promoting 
the reunion of Christendom. 


Ar 


M] 
úd 
EN 
Mx 
d 
" L 
FEES 
= 
E 


- 


pa ay, Pr a 
ἈΞ ἊΝ τὰ 4 αν 


= 


Ac Fly Ya) "ut 


- M 
Dr, 
Wi lá 
SY % 
Seay Fu), 
Ἢ 4 Ἂν 
- 
# 
. 
, 
i 
" 
; 
à 
, 


> Á 


Ας 


στ. 
y ri 


APPENDIX 


CONTAINING THE ORIGINAL LATIN AND 
GREEK TEXTS, AND OTHER ORIGINAL 
MATTER, REFERRED TO IN THE 
PRECEDING CHAPTERS 


APPENDIX 


Justin Martyr. 110-165 Α.Ὀ. 
I Aror. Cu. 65-67 


” [4 ^ ^ ^ > 

65. .. . Ἔπειτα προσφέρεται τῷ προεστῶτι τῶν ἀδελ- 
hav ἄρτος καὶ ποτήριον ὕδατος kal κράματος. καὶ οὗτος 
λαβὼν αἶνον καὶ δόξαν τῷ Πατρὶ τῶν ὅλων διὰ τοῦ ὀνό- 
ματος τοῦ Ὑἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος τοῦ ᾿Αγίου ἀναπέμπει 
καὶ εὐχαριστίαν ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατηξιῶσθαι τούτων παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ 
ἐπὶ πολὺ ποιεῖται' οὗ συντελέσαντος τὰς εὐχὰς καὶ τὴν 
, / "^ s \ ^ , ^ Ζ ἃ e? # "9 
εὐχαριστίαν πᾶς ὁ παρὼν λαὸς ἐπευφημεῖ λέγων Αμήν. 

Ν \ > \ ae „h ^ NA [4 / , 
τὸ δὲ ἀμὴν τῇ ᾿Ββραϊΐδι φωνῇ τὸ γένοιτο σηµαίνει. Evxa- 
ριστήσαντος δὲ τοῦ προεστῶτος καὶ ἐπευφημήσαντος TTAV- 

^ ^ S ^ 

τὸς τοῦ λαοῦ οἱ καλούμενοι παρ᾽ ἡμῖν διάκονοι διδόασιν 
ἑκάστῳ τῶν παρόντων μεταλαβεῖν ἀπὸ τοῦ εὐχαριστηθέντος 
ἄρτου καὶ οἴνου καὶ ὕδατος καὶ τοῖς οὐ παροῦσιν ἀποφέ. 
ρουσι. 

66. Καὶ ἡ τροφὴ αὕτη καλεῖται παρ᾽ ἡμῖν εὐχαριστία 

ἫΝ m 
οὐ γὰρ ὡς κοινὸν ἄρτον οὐδὲ κοινὸν πόμα ταῦτα λαμ- 

βάνομεν, ἀλλ᾽ ὃν τρόπον διὰ λόγου Θεοῦ σαρκοποιηθεὶς 
> ^ \ € X e ^ N , X © € N 
Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς ὁ Σωτὴρ ἡμῶν καὶ σάρκα καὶ αἷμα ὑπερ 
σωτηρίας ἡμῶν ἔσχεν, οὕτως καὶ τὴν δι εὐχῆς λόγου τοῦ 
παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ εὐχαριστηθεῖσαν τροφήν, ἐξ ἣς αἷμα καὶ σάρκες 
κατὰ μεταβολὴν τρέφονται ἡμῶν. ἐκείνου τοῦ σαρκοποιη- 

, , ^ \ , ἣν © , , = - 
θέντος ᾿Ιησοῦ καὶ σάρκα καὶ αἷμα ἐδιδάχθημεν εἶναι. Οἱ 
γὰρ ἀπόστολοι ἐν τοῖς γενομένοις ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν ἀπομνημονεύ- 
μασιν, ἃ καλεῖται εὐαγγέλια, οὕτως παρέδωκαν ἐντετάλθαι 
αὐτοῖς ' τὸν 'Igcoüv λαβόντα ἄρτον εὐχαριστήσαντα εἰπεῖν" 

^ ^ \ ^ 
««τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἀνάμνησίν µου, τουτέστι τὸ σῶμά 
FK 
µου. Καὶ τὸ ποτήριον ὁμοίως λαβόντα καὶ εὐχαριστήσαντα 
εἰπεῖν" τοῦτό ἐστιν αἷμά μου," καὶ μόνοις αὐτοῖς µετα- 
δοῦναι . . 
247 


245 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


67. . . . Kai, ὡς προέφηµεν, παυσαμένων ἡμῶν τῆς 
εὐχῆς ἄρτος προσφέρεται καὶ οἶνος καὶ ὕδωρ, καὶ ὁ προεσ- 
τὼς εὐχὰς ὁμοίως καὶ εὐχαριστίας, ὅση δύναμις αὐτῷ, ἀνα- 

, \ ε \ , ^ / \ , ΄ \ e 
πέμπει καὶ ὁ λαὸς ἐπευφημεῖ λέγων τὸ ἀμήν: καὶ ἡ 

, \ 3 , , \ n « , / 
διάδοσις καὶ ἡ μετάληψις ἀπὸ τῶν εὐχαριστηθέντων 
ἑκάστῳ «γίνεται καὶ τοῖς οὐ παροῦσι διὰ τῶν διακόνων 
πέμπεται. P. G. vi., 428, 429. 


Irengeus. 120-202 a.p. 


Adv. Haereses, Bk. V., ch. ii., 3 
c , 5 N N , , \ ς \ 
Οπότε οὖν καὶ TO κεκραμένον ποτήριον καὶ ὁ γεγονὼς 
3/ , / \ , ^ ^ \ / ς > 
ἄρτος ἐπιδέχεται τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ γίνεται ἡ εὖὐχα- 
V, ^ 7 ^ \ e , Ν , 
ριστία σῶμα Χριστοῦ. . . Καὶ ὅνπερ τρόπον τὸ ξύλον 
^ > / ) ^ , \ ^ ^ 5$ S ἢ , 
τῆς ἀμπέλου κλιθὲν εἰς τὴν γῆν τῷ ἰδίῳ καιρῷ ἐκαρποφό- 
ρησε, καὶ ὁ κόκκος τοῦ σίτου πεσὼν εἰς τὴν γῆν καὶ διαλυ- 
θείς, πολλοστὸς ἐγέρθη διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος τοῦ Θεοῦ, τοῦ 
/ \ , » \ \ ^ / ^ ^ 
συνέχοντος τὰ πάντα" ἔπειτα δὲ διὰ τῆς σοφίας τοῦ Θεοῦ 
> ^ > , > , \ , N 
εἰς χρῆσιν ἐλθόντα ἀνθρώπων, καὶ προσλαμβανόμενα τὸν 
λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, εὐχαριστία γίνεται, ὅπερ ἐστὶ σῶμα καὶ 
αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Ῥ. G. vii., 1125, 1127. 


Ibid. Bk. IV., ch. xviii., 5 
€ \ > \ ^ » , \ » s 
Os yap ἀπὸ γῆς ἄρτος προσλαμβανόμενος τὴν ἐπί 
1 ^ ^ , , ^ » > / » » 3 y 
κλησιν} τοῦ Θεοῦ οὐκέτι κοινὸς ἄρτος ἐστίν, ἀλλ. εὐχαριστία, 
ἐκ δύο πραγμάτων συνεστηκεῖα. ἐπιγείου TE καὶ οὐρανίου. 
P. 6. vii., 1028, 1029. 
Ibid. Bk. I., ch. xiii., 2 
Ποτήρια οἴνῳ κεκραµένα προσποιούμενος. εὐχαριστεῖν, 
\ > \ [4 > s ἂν , ^ > Bi 
καὶ ἐπὶ πλέον ἐκτείνων τὸν λόγον τῆς ἐπικλήσεως, πορφυ- 
^ Ns NE / θ ο εὶς ὃ ^ \ > x ^ 
ρέα καὶ ἐρυθρὰ ἀναφαίνεσθαι ποιεῖ * ὡς δοκεῖν τὴν ἀπὸ τῶν 
€ \ Nee: , N Φ Ν c ^ , > 1 , ἊΝ 
ὑπὲρ τὰ ὅλα Χάριν τὸ αἷμα τὸ ἑαυτῆς στάζειν ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ 
ποτηρίῳ διὰ τῆς ἐπικλήσεως αὐτοῦ. P. 6. vii., 580. 


1 ᾿Ἐπίκλησιν for ἔκκλησι. See Holl, Fragmente Vornicän. Kirchen- 
väter, Ῥ. 61. Texte u. Unters., N. F., V. 2. 


APPENDIX 249 


Fragment xxxvi., ed. Harvey, Vol. II., 500-505 
/ \ ^ ^ \ » \ A , 
εν Ἡροσφέρομεν γὰρ τῷ Θεῷ τὸν ἄρτον καὶ Τὸ ποτή- 
ριον τῆς εὐλογίας, εὐχαριστοῦντες αὐτῷ ὅτι τῇ γῇ ἐκέλευσεν 
ἐκφῦσαι τοὺς καρποὺς τούτους εἰς τροφὴν ἡμετέραν, καὶ 
, ^ \ X / , ^ \ ^ 
ἐνταῦθα τὴν προσφορὰν τελέσαντες ἐκκαλοῦμεν τὸ Πνεῦμα 
Ni er , [4 A s [4 \ \ » 
TO "A'ytov, ὅπως ἀποφήνῃ τὴν θυσίαν ταύτην καὶ τὸν ἄρτον 
σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τὸ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ, 
e ^ ^ 
ἵνα οἱ μεταλαβόντες τούτων τῶν ἀντιτύπων, τῆς ἀφέσεως 
τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν καὶ τῆς ζωῆς αἰωνίου τύχωσιν. 
Irenaeus to Vietor. Eusebius, Hist. Ecel., v., 24 
. . . Kai τούτων οὕτως ἐχόντων, ἐκοινώνησαν ἑαυτοῖς : 
NU A 3 / , £739 s ^ , 
καὶ ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ παρεχώρησεν ὁ ᾿Ανίκητος τὴν εὐχαρι- 
s 


e 
^ 


στίαν τῷ Πολυκάρπῳ. kar ἐντροπὴν δηλονότι, καὶ μετ 
εἰρήνης ἀπ᾿ ἀλλήλων ἀπηλλάγησαν. . . P. G. vii., 1232. 


Clement of Alexandria. ἢ. c. 202 a.p. 
Stromata, Bk. I., ch. xix. 


Εἰσὶ γὰρ οἱ kal ὕδωρ ψιλὸν εὐχαριστοῦσιν. 
Be α. σα, 818. 


Origen. 185-252 A.D. 
On St. Matt. xv., 11 
Ei δὲ πᾶν τὸ εἰσπορευόμενον eis τὸ στόμα εἰς κοιλίαν 
^ M , , ^ , , \ \ ig , 
χωρεῖ καὶ εἰς ἀφεδρῶνα ἐκβάλλεται, καὶ τὸ ἁγιαζόμενον 
^ S , ^ N , / , , \ \ b 
βρῶμα διὰ λόγου Θεοῦ καὶ ἐντεύξεως, κατ᾽ αὐτὸ μὲν τὸ 
ὑλικὸν εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν χωρεῖ καὶ εἰς ἀφεδρῶνα ἐκβάλλεται" 
κατὰ δὲ τὴν ἐπιγενομένην αὐτῷ εὐχήν, κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν 
τῆς πίστεως, ὠφέλιμον γίνεται, καὶ τῆς τοῦ νοῦ αἴτιον 
διαβλέψεως ὁρῶντος ἐπὶ τὸ ὠφελοῦν" καὶ οὐχ ἡ ὕλη τοῦ 
” > DICH, > > ^^ > / / > M - | ^ A 
άρτου, ἀλλ ο ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ εἰρημένος λόγος ἐστὶν ὁ ὠφελῶν τὸν 
μὴ ἀναξίως τοῦ Κυρίου ἐσθίοντα αὐτόν. — P.G. xiii., 949. 
Contra Celsum, viii., 33 


Ἡμεῖς δὲ τῷ τοῦ παντὸς Δημιούργῷ εὐχαριστοῦντες, καὶ 
τοὺς μετ᾽ εὐχαριστίας καὶ εὐχῆς τῆς ἐπὶ τοῖς δοθεῖσι προ- 


250 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


σαγοµένους ἄρτους ἐσθίομεν, σῶμα γενομένους διὰ τὴν 
εὐχὴν ἅγιόν τι καὶ ἁγιάζον τοὺς μετὰ ὑγιοῦς προθέσεως 
αὐτῷ χρωμένους. P. G. xi., 1565. 


Tertullian. 145-220 a.p. 
Adv. Marcion., Bk. IV., ch. xl. 

Professus itaque [Christus] se concupiscentia concupisse 
edere pascha ut suum (indignum enim, ut quid alienum 
concupisceret Deus) acceptum panem et distributum 
discipulis corpus suum fecit, “Hoc est corpus meum" 
dicendo, id est figura corporis mei. Figura autem non 
fuisset, nisi veritatis esset corpus. P. L. ii., 491. 


Firmilian to Cyprian. 256 a.p. 


Atqui illa mulier . . . etiam hoc freguenter ausa est, 
ut et invocatlone non contemptibile sanctificare se panem 
et eucharistiam facere simularet, et sacrifieium Domino 


non sine sacramento solitae praedicationis offeret. 
P. L. iii., 1213. 


Cyprian. 200-258 A.D. 
Epistle (to Epictetus, etc.), Ixiv., 4 
Nec oblatio sanctificari illic possit ubi Spiritus Sanc- 
tus non sit, nec cuiguam Dominus per ejus orationes et 


preces prosit qui Dominum ipse violavit. 
P. L. iv., 404. 


De Oratione Dominica, ch. xxxi. 


Sacerdos, ante orationem praefatione praemissa parat 
fratrum mentes dicendo: “ Sursum corda." P.L. iv., 537. 


De unitate Ecclesiae Catholicae, ch. xvii. 

Hostis altaris, adversus sacrificium Christi rebellis, 
pro fide perfidus, pro religione sacrilegus, inobsequens 
servus, filius impius, frater inimieus, contemptis episcopis 
et Dei sacerdotibus derelietis, constituere audet aliud 


APPENDIX 251 


altare, precem alteram illieitis vocibus facere, Dominicae 
hostiae veritatem per falsa sacrificia profanare. 
P. L. iv., 529. 


Dionysius of Alexandria 
In Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. Bk. VII., ch. ix. 
Εὐχαριστίας γὰρ ἐπακούσαντα καὶ συνεπιφθεγξάµενον 
τὸ ᾽Αμὴν καὶ τραπέζῃ παραστάντα καὶ χεῖρας εἰς ὑποδοχὴν 
τῆς ἁγίας τροφῆς προτείναντα. . . . P. G. xx., 656. 


Athanasius of Alexandria. 296-373 a.p. 
Sermo in bapt. (Fragments) 

"Owret τοὺς λευίτας φέροντας ἄρτους καὶ ποτήριον οἴνου, 
καὶ τιθέντας δὲ τὴν τράπεζαν" καὶ ὅσον οὔπω (cea (at καὶ 

, s J > ΕΝ \ \ / > > 
δεήσεις γίνονται, ψιλός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος καὶ τὸ ποτήριον ἐπ 
X V 3 ^ c / \ \ > / , 
ἂν δὲ ἐπιτελεσθῶσιν αἱ μεγάλαι καὶ θαυμασταὶ εὐχαί, τότε 
γίνεται ὁ ἄρτος σῶμα, καὶ τὸ ποτήριον αἷμα τοῦ Κυρίου 
ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. 


ΛΝ \ N \ / ^ / © € 
Ἐλθωμεν ἐπὶ τὴν τελείωσιν τῶν μυστηρίων - οὗτος ὁ 
ἄρτος καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον, ὅσον οὔπω εὐχαὶ καὶ ἰκεσίαι 
/ , > > > ^ \ € , , \ \ e M 
γεγόνασι, ψιλά εἰσι" ἐπ᾽ ἂν δὲ αἱ μεγάλαι εὐχαὶ καὶ ἁγίαι 
c / » ^ / ς / > \ » 
ἱκεσίαι ἀναπεμφθῶσιν, καταβαίνει ὁ Λόγος eis τὸν ἄρτον 
^ ^ ^ 
καὶ τὸ ποτήριον, kai γίνεται αὐτοῦ τὸ σῶμα. 
IPP 6. xxvi. 1925. 


Eusebius of Cesarea. c. 260-340 a.p. 
De Laudibus Constantini. Cap. xvi. 
᾿Αναίμους δὲ καὶ λογικὰς θυσίας τὰς δι’ εὐχῶν Kal ἄπορ- 
ρήτου θεολογίας τοῖς αὐτοῦ θιασώταις τίς ἐπιτελεῖν παρέ- 
δωκεν ἄλλος ἢ μόνος ὁ ἡμέτερος Σωτήρ; P.G. xx., 1425. 


Quaestiones Veteris et Novi Testamenti. Fourth century 
Quaestio CIX. 

Christus autem Vicarius Patris est et antistes, ac per 

hoc dicitur et Sacerdos. Similiter et Spiritus Sanctus 

quasi antistes, Sacerdos appellatus excelsi Dei, non Sum- 


252 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


mus, sicut nostri in oblatione praesumunt. Quia quam- 
vis unius sit substantiae Christus et Spiritus Sanctus, 


uniuscujusgue tamen ordo observandus est. 
P. Li. xxxv.;. 2329. 


The Sacramentary of Serapion. c. 350 a.p. 

Πλήρης ἐστὶν ὁ οὐρανός, πλήρης ἐστὶν καὶ ἡ γῆ τῆς 
μεγαλοπρεποῦς σου δόξης, Κύριε τῶν δυνάμεων ' πλήρωσον 
καὶ τὴν θυσίαν ταύτην τῆς σῆς δυνάμεως καὶ τῆς σῆς μετα- 
λήψεως * σοὶ γὰρ προσηνέγκαμεν ταύτην τὴν ζῶσαν θυσίαν 
τὴν προσφορὰν τὴν ἀναίμακτον. 

Σοὶ προσηνέγκαμεν τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον, τὸ ὁμοίωμα τοῦ 
σώματος τοῦ μονογενοῦς. ὁ ἄρτος οὗτος τοῦ ἁγίου σώματός 
ἐστιν ὁμοίωμα, ὅτι ὁ Κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς ἐν ἡ νυκτὶ 
παρεδίδοτο ἔλαβεν ἄρτον καὶ ἔκλασεν καὶ ἐδίδου τοῖς 
μαθηταῖς ἑαυτοῦ λέγων" “Λάβετε καὶ φάγετε, τοῦτό ἐστιν 
τὸ σῶμά μου τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν κλώμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν." 
διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἡμεῖς τὸ ὁμοίωμα τοῦ θανάτου ποιοῦντες τὸν 
ἄρτον προσηνέγκαμεν, καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν διὰ τῆς θυσίας 
ταύτης, καταλλάγηθι πᾶσιν ἡμῖν καὶ ἱλάσθητι, Θεὲ τῆς 
ἀληθείας - καὶ ὥσπερ ὁ ἄρτος οὗτος ἐσκορπισμένος ἦν 
ἐπάνω τῶν ὀρέων καὶ συναχθεὶς ἐγένετο εἰς Ev, οὕτω καὶ 
τὴν ἁγίαν σου ἐκκλησίαν σύναξον ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους καὶ 
πάσης χώρας καὶ πάσης πόλεως καὶ κώμης καὶ οἴκου 
καὶ ποίησον μίαν ζῶσαν καθολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν. 

Προσηνέγκαμεν δὲ καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τὸ ὁμοίωμα τοῦ 
αἵματος, ὅτι Κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς λαβὼν ποτήριον μετὰ 
τὸ δειπνῆσαι ἔλεγεν τοῖς ἑαυτοῦ μαθηταῖς - “ Λάβετε 
πίετε, τοῦτό ἐστιν ἡ καινὴ διαθήκη. ὅ ἐστιν τὸ αἷμά μου τὸ 
ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἐκχυνόμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτημάτων." διὰ 
τοῦτο προσηνέγκαμεν καὶ ἡμεῖς τὸ ποτήριον ὁμοίωμα αἵμα- 
τος προσάγοντες. 

᾿Επιδημησάτω. Θεὲ τῆς ἀληθείας, ὁ ἅγιός σου Λόγος ἐπὶ 
τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον, ἵνα γένηται ὁ ἄρτος σῶμα τοῦ Λόγου, καὶ 
ἐπὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο, ἵνα γένηται τὸ ποτήριον αἷμα τῆς 


APPENDIX 253 


᾿Αληθείας. καὶ ποίησον πάντας τοὺς κοινωνοῦντας φάρ- 
µακον ζωῆς λαβεῖν εἰς θεραπείαν παντὸς νοσήματος καὶ εἰς 
ἐνδυνάμωσιν πάσης προκοπῆς kal ἀρετῆς, μὴ εἰς κατά- 
κρισιν, Θεὲ τῆς ἀληθείας, μηδὲ εἰς ἔλεγχον καὶ ὄνειδος. Σὲ 
γὰρ τὸν ἀγένητον ἐπεκαλεσάμεθα διὰ τοῦ μονογενοῦς ἐν 
‘Ayo Ilveúnaru. 

The Journal of Theological Studies, Vol. I., 105—100. 


The Liturgy of the Eighth Book of the Apostolic Con- 
stitutions. c. 375 A.D. 

Μεμνημένοι οὖν ὧν δι’ ἡμᾶς ὑπέμεινεν εὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι, 
Θεὲ παντοκράτορ. οὐχ ὅσον ὀφείλομεν ἀλλ᾽ ὅσον δυνάμεθα 
καὶ τὴν διάταξιν αὐτοῦ πληροῦμεν. ἐν ἣ γὰρ νυκτὶ παρε- 
δίδοτο λαβὼν ἄρτον ταῖς ἁγίαις καὶ ἀμώμοις αὐτοῦ χερσὶ 
καὶ ἀναβλέψας πρὸς σὲ τὸν Θεὸν αὐτοῦ καὶ Πατέρα καὶ 
κλάσας ἔδωκε τοῖς μαθηταῖς εἰπὼν ““Τοῦτο τὸ μυστήριον τῆς 

^ 7 , , , "^ , ^ 1^ 4-1 \ 
καινῆς διαθήκης * λάβετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ, bdyere τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ 
σῶμά µου τὸ περὶ πολλῶν θρυπτόµενον eis ἄφεσιν ἁμαρ- 
TLOV." ὡσαύτως καὶ τὸ ποτήριον κεράσας ἐξ οἴνου καὶ 
δ ke , , 5 , ^ / "m / , > ^ 
ὕδατος καὶ ἁγιάσας ἐπέδωκεν αὐτοῖς λέγων * Πίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ 
πάντες" τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ αἷμά µου τὸ περὶ πολλῶν ἐκχυνό- 
μενον eis ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν - τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν 
ἀνάμνησιν: ὁσάκις γὰρ ἂν ἐσθίητε τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον καὶ τὸ 
ποτήριον τοῦτο πίνητε τὸν θάνατον τὸν ἐμὸν καταγγέλλετε 
» A » “5 
ἄχρις ἂν ἔλθω. ! 

Μεμνημένοι τοίνυν τοῦ πάθους αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ θανάτου 
καὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως καὶ τῆς εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἐπανόδου καὶ τῆς 
μελλούσης αὐτοῦ δευτέρας παρουσίας ἐν ἡ ἔρχεται κρῖναι 
ζῶντας καὶ νεκροὺς καὶ ἀποδοῦναι ἑκάστῳ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα 

, ^ , , ^ ^ Ex ^ \ \ 
αὐτοῦ, προσφέροµέν σοι τῷ Βασιλεῖ καὶ Θεῷ κατὰ τὴν 
αὐτοῦ διάταξιν τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο 

^ ^ T ^ € 
εὐχαριστοῦντές σοι δι αὐτοῦ ἐφ᾽ οἷς κατηξίωσας ἡμᾶς éc- 
, ^ "^ 5 
τάναι ἐνώπιόν σου καὶ ἱερατεύειν σοι, καὶ ἀξιοῦμέν σε ὅπως 

, ^ ^ ^ , 
εὐμενῶς ἐπιβλέψῃς ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα ἐνώπιόν 

ιά ^ » 
σου, σὺ 0 ἀνενδεὴς Θεός, καὶ εὐδοκήσῃς ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς eis τιμὴν 


254 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


τοῦ Χριστοῦ cov καὶ καταπέµψης τὸ "Ayıov σου Πνεῦμα 
ἐπὶ τὴν θυσίαν ταύτην, τὸν μάρτυρα τῶν παθημάτων τοῦ 
Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ. ὅπως ἀποφήνῃ τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον σῶμα τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ σου καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου. 
ἵνα οἱ μεταλαβόντες αὐτοῦ βεβαιωθῶσι πρὸς εὐσέβειαν, 
ἀφέσεως ἁμαρτημάτων τύχωσι, τοῦ διαβόλου καὶ τῆς 
πλάνης αὐτοῦ ῥυσθῶσι, Πνεύματος Αγίου πληρωθῶσιν, 
ἄξιοι τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου γένωνται, ζωῆς αἰωνίου τύχωσι, σοῦ 


καταλλαγέντος αὐτοῖς, Δέσποτα παντοκράτορ. 
BRIGHTMAN, Lit. E. and W., i., 20-21. 


Cyril of Jerusalem. c. 315-386 A.n. 
Catecheses, XIX. (Myst. I.), 7 
Ὥσπερ yap ὁ ἄρτος καὶ ὁ οἶνος τῆς εὐχαριστίας πρὸ τῆς 
ἁγίας ἐπικλήσεως τῆς προσκυνητῆς Τριάδος ἄρτος ἣν καὶ 
οἶνος λιτός, ἐπικλήσεως δὲ γενομένης ὁ μὲν ἄρτος γίνεται 
σῶμα Χριστοῦ, ὁ δὲ οἶνος αἷμα Χριστοῦ - τὸν αὐτὸν δὴ 
τρόπον, κ.τ.λ. P. G. xxxiii., 1072. 


Ibid., XXI. (Myst. III), 8 
Ὥσπερ yap ὁ ἄρτος τῆς εὐχαριστίας μετὰ τὴν ἐπίκλησιν 
τοῦ "Αγίου Πνεύματος οὐκ ἔτι ἄρτος ALTOS, ἀλλὰ σῶμα 
Χριστοῦ, οὕτω, κ.τ.λ. P. G. xxxiii., 1089, 1092. 


Ibid., XXIII. (Myst. V.), 4, 5, 6, 7 

(4) Μετὰ τοῦτο βοᾷ ὁ ἱερεύς. "Avo τὰς καρδίας... . 
εως Εἶτα ἀποκρίνεσθε " *" Exopev πρὸς τὸν Κύριον. .. . 
(5) Εἶτα ὁ ἱερεὺς λέγει ' “ Εὐχαριστήσωμεν τῷ Kupio.”.. . 
. Εἶτα λέγετε: “"Αξιον καὶ δίκαιον.’  Εὐχαρισ- 
τοῦντες γὰρ ἡμεῖς ἄξιον ποιοῦμεν πρᾶγμα καὶ δίκαιον. . . . 
(0) Μετὰ ταῦτα μνημονεύομεν οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς καὶ 
θαλάσσης, ἡλίου καὶ σελήνης, ἄστρων καὶ πάσης τῆς 
κτίσεως λογικῆς τε καὶ ἀλόγου, ὁρατῆς τε καὶ ἀοράτου, 
ἀγγέλων, ἀρχαγγέλων, δυνάμεων, κυριοτήτων, ἀρχῶν, ἐξ- 
ουσιῶν, θρόνων, τῶν χερουβὶμ τῶν πολυπροσώπων, δυνάμει 
λέγοντες τὸ τοῦ Δαβὶδ “ MeyaNúvare τὸν Κύριον σὺν 

. 


APPENDIX 255 


ἐμοί." Mvnuoveúonev kal τῶν cepabíu, ἃ ἐν Ilvevuarı 
ε / , / , , , ΄ ^ , 
Ayio ἐθεάσατο ᾿Ησαίας παρεστηκότα κύκλῳ τοῦ θρόνου 
τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ ταῖς μὲν δυσὶ πτέρυξι κατακαλύπτοντα τὸ 
πρόσωπον, ταῖς δέ δυσὶ τοὺς πόδας, καὶ ταῖς δυσὶ πετό- 
(d 
μενα, καὶ λέγοντα * "Άγιος Άγιος "Άγιος Κύριος σά- 
22 \ A \ \ ^ en , ^ 
ßa00.” Διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ τὴν παραδοθεῖσαν ἡμῖν ἐκ τῶν 
σεραφὶμ θεολογίαν ταύτην λέγομεν, ὅπως κοινωνοὶ τῆς 
ὑμνωδίας ταῖς ὑπερκοσμίοις γενώμεθα στρατιαῖς. 

(1) Εἶτα, ἁγιάσαντες ἑαυτοὺς διὰ τῶν πνευματικῶν τού- 
των ὕμνων, παρακαλοῦμεν τὸν φιλάνθρωπον Θεόν, τὸ 
STA! TI ^ , EN 1 \ \ / " 

yıov Πνεῦμα ἐξαποστεῖλαι ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα, ἵνα 

^ ^ Ν 5 © 
ποιήσῃ τὸν μὲν ἄρτον σῶμα Χριστοῦ, τὸν δὲ οἶνον αἷμα 
^ ^ ^ 
Χριστοῦ: πάντως γὰρ ob ἐὰν ἐφάψαιτο τὸ Αγιον ΤΠ] νεῦμα, 
^ c s \ / 
τοῦτο ἡγίασται καὶ µεταβέβληται. 
Έα σοι, Πρ 16, 


Ibid., XXIII. (Myst. V.), 19 
Μετὰ ταῦτα λέγει ὁ ἱερεύς - “Ta ἅγια τοῖς dyíous." 
eu N / 1 s , € / / 
ἅγια τὰ προκείμενα, ἐπιφοίτησιν δεξάµενα ᾽Αγίου Ilvev- 
ματος. BAG sli 1194. 


Optatus of Milevis. fl. c. 568 A.n. 
De Schism, Don., Bk. VL, 1 


Quid tam sacrilegum, quam altaria Dei, in quibus et 
vos aliquando obtulistis, frangere, radere, removere? 
in quibus et vota populi et membra Christi portata sunt ? 
quo Deus omnipotens invocatus sit, quo postulatus de- 
scendit Spiritus Sanctus? unde a multis et pignus salu- 
tis aeternae et tutela fidei et spes resurrectionis accepta 
est? . . . Si livoris judicio nos: vobis sordidi videbamur 
quid vobis fecerat Deus, qui illie invocari consueverat ? 
quid vos offenderat Christus, cujus illie per certa [caetera] 
momenta corpus et sanguis habitabant? quid offendis- 
tis etiam vos ipsi, ut illa altaria frangeretis in quibus ante 
nos per longa temporum spatia, sancte (ut arbitramini) 
obtulistis ? P. L. xi., 1064-1066. 


256 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Basil of Cesarea. 330-378 a.p. 
De Spiritu Sancto, xxvii. 

Τὰ τῆς ἐπικλήσεως ῥήματα ἐπὶ τῇ ἀναδείξει τοῦ ἄρτου 
τῆς εὐχαριστίας καὶ τοῦ ποτηρίου τῆς εὐλογίας, τίς τῶν 
ἁγίων ἐγγράφως ἡμῖν καταλέλοιπεν: οὐ γὰρ δὴ τούτοις 
ἀρκούμεθα, ὧν ὁ ἀπόστολος ἢ τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐπεμνήσθηῃ., 
ἀλλὰ καὶ προλέγομεν καὶ ἐπιλέγομεν ἕτερα, ὡς μεγάλην 
ἔχοντα πρὸς τὸ μυστήριον τὴν ἰσχύν, ἐκ τῆς ἀγράφου 
διδασκαλίας παραλαβόντες. P. G. xxxii., 188. 


Ambrose of Milan. 340-397 a.p. 
De Spiritu Sancto, Bk. III., ch. xvi. 
Quomodo igitur [Spiritus Sanetus] non omnia habet, 
quae Dei sunt, qui cum Patre et Filio a sacerdotibus in 


baptismate nominatur, et in oblationibus invocatur ? 
IPSI xvi., 891. 


De Fide, Bk. IV., ch. x. 
Nos autem quotiescunque sacramenta sumimus, quae 
per sacrae orationis mysterium in carnem transfigurantur 


et sanguinem, mortem Domini annuntiamus. 
PA vi 60176 


De Mysteriis, ix., 50, 52, 53, 54 

50. Forte dieas: “ Aliud video, quomodo tu mihi asseris 
quod Christi corpus aceiplam?” Et hoc nobis adhuc su- 
perest ut probemus. Guantis igitur utimur exemplis! 
Probemus non hoc esse guod natura formavit, sed guod 
benedietio consecravit: majoremgue vim esse benedic- 
tionis quam naturae; quia benedictione etiam natura ipsa 
mutatur. 

52. Advertimus igitur majoris esse virtutis gratiam 
quam naturam, et adhue tamen propheticae benedic- 
tionis numeramus gratiam. Quod si tam valuit humana 
benedictio, ut naturam converteret; quid dicimus de 
ipsa consecratione divina, ubi verba ipsa Domini Sal- 
vatoris operantur? Nam sacramentum istud quod ac- 


APPENDIX 257 


cipis, Christi sermone conficitur. Quod si tantum valuit 
sermo Eliae, ut ignem de coelo deponeret: non valebit 
Christi sermo, ut species mutet elementorum? De totius 
mundi operibus legisti: “ Guia ipse dixit, et facta sunt: 
Ipse mandavit, et creata sunt;" sermo ergo Christi qui 
potuit ex nihilo facere quod non erat, non potest ea 
quae sunt in id mutare quod non erant? Non enim 
minus est novas rebus dare quam mutare naturas. 

53. Sed quid argumentis utimur? Suis utamur ex- 
emplis, incarnationisque exemplo astruamus mysterii 
veritatem. Numquid naturae usus praecessit cum Jesus 
Dominus ex Maria nasceretur? Si ordinem quaerimus, 
viro mista femina generare consuevit. Linquet igitur 
quod praeter naturae ordinem virgo generavit, et hoc 
quod conficimus corpus, ex Virgine est: quid hie quaeris 
naturae ordinem in Christi corpore, cum praeter naturam 
sit ipse Dominus Jesus partus ex Virgine? Vera utique 
«aro Christi, quae crucifixa est, quae sepulta est: vere ergo 
«carnis illius sacramentum est. 

54. Ipse clamat Dominus Jesus: “Hoc est corpus 
meum." Ante benedictionem verborum coelestium alia 
species nominatur, post consecrationem corpus signifi- 
catur. Ipse dieit sanguinem suum. Ante consecrationem 
aliud dicitur, post consecrationem sanguis nuncupatur. 
Et tu dieis: “ Amen," hoc est, * Verum est." Quod os 
loquitur, mens interna fateatur: quod sermo sonat, 
affectus sentiat. P. L. xvi., 422-424. 


De Benedictionibus Patriareharum. Cap. IX., 38 


Aser pinguis ejus panis, et ipse dabit escam principibus. 
. . . Hie ergo dives est thesaurus, hujus pinguis panis. 
Et bene pinguis quem qui manducaverit, esurire non 
poterit. Hunc panem dedit apostolis, ut dividerent 
populo credentium; hodieque nobis eum, quem ipse 
quotidie sacerdos consecrat suis verbis. Hic ergo panis 
factus est esca sanctorum. P.L. xiv, 719.- 


258 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


De Sacramentis. c. 400 a.p. 
Lib. IV., iv., 14-17, 19 

14. Tu forte dicis: ‘‘Meus panis est usitatus." Sed 
panis iste panis est ante verba sacramentorum: ubi 
aecesserit consecratio, de pane fit caro Christi. Hoe 
igitur astruamus. Quomodo potest qui panis est, corpus 
esse Christi? Consecratione. Consecratio autem quibus 
verbis est, cujus sermonibus? Domini Jesu. Nam et re- 
liqua omnia quae dicuntur in superioribus, a sacerdote 
dieuntur, laudes Deo deferuntur, oratio petitur pro 
populo, pro regibus, pro caeteris: ubi venitur ut conficia- 
tur venerabile sacramentum, jam non suls sermonibus 
utitur sacerdos, sed utitur sermonibus Christi. Ergo 
sermo Christi hoc conficit sacramentum. 

15. Quis est sermo Christi? Nempe is quo facta sunt 
omnia. Jussit Dominus, et factum est coelum; jussit 
Dominus, et facta est terra; jussit Dominus, et facta 
sunt maria; jussit Dominus, et omnis creatura generata 
est. Vides ergo quam operatorius sit sermo Christi. 
Si ergo tanta vis est in sermone Domini Jesu, ut inciperent 
esse quae non erant, quanto magis operatorius est, ut 
sint quae erant, et in aliud commutentur. Coelum non 
erat, mare non erat, terra non erat, sed audi dicentem 
David: Ipse dixit, et jacta sunt; Ipse mandavit, et creata 
sunt. 

16. Ergo tibi ut respondeam, non erat corpus Christi 
ante consecrationem: sed post consecrationem dico tibi 
quia jam corpus est Christi. Ipse dixit, et factum est, 
Ipse mandavit, et creatum est. Tu ipse eras, sed eras vetus 
creatura: postea quam consecratus es, nova creatura, esse 
coepisti. Vis scire quam nova creatura? Omnis, inquit, 
in Christo nova creatura. 

17. Accipe ergo quemadmodum sermo Christi creatu- 
ram omnem mutare consueverit, et mutet, cum vult, 
instituta naturae. Quomodo requiris? — Accipe, et primo 
omnium de generatione ejus sumamus exemplum. 


APPENDIX 259 


. 
Consuetudo est ut non generetur homo, nisi ex viro et 
muliere, et consuetudine conjugali; sed quia voluit 
Dominus, quia hoc elegit sacramentum, de Spiritu Sancto 
et Virgine natus est Christus, hoc est, mediator Dei et 
hominum homo Christus Jesus. Vides ergo gula contra 
instituta et ordinem natus est, homo est natus ex Virgine. 
19. Ex his igitur omnibus non intelligis guantum 
operetur sermo coelestis? Si operatus est in fonte ter- 
reno, si operatus est sermo coelestis in aliis rebus, non 
operatur in coelestibus sacramentis? Ergo didieisti guod 
ex pane corpus fiat Christi, et quod vinum et aqua in 
calicem mittitur: sed fit sanguis consecratione verbi 
coelestis. P. L. xvi., 458-462. 


IV., v., 21-25 


21. Vis scire quia verbis coelestibus consecratur? 
Accipe quae sunt verba. Dicit sacerdos: Fac nobis, 
inquit, hanc oblationem ascriptam, ratam, rationabilem, 
acceptabilem : quod figura est corporis et sanguinis Domini 
nostri Jesu Christi. Qui pridie quam pateretur, in sanctis 
manibus suis accepit panem, respexit in coelum ad te, 
sancte Pater omnipotens, aeterne Deus, gratias agens, bene- 
dixit, fregit, fractumgue apostolis suis et discipulis suis 
tradidit, dicens: Accipite, et edite ex hoc omnes; hoc est 
enim corpus meum, quod pro multis confringetur. 

22. Similiter etiam | calicem postquam coenatum est, 
pridie quam pateretur, accepit, respexit in coelum ad te, 
sancte Pater omnipotens, aeterne Deus, gratias agens, 
benedixit, apostolis suis οἱ discipulis suis tradidit, dicens: 
Accipite, et bibite ex hoc omnes; hic est enim sanguis meus. 
Vide illa omnia. Illa verba evangelistae sunt usque ad 
Accipite sive, corpus, sive sanguinem. Inde verba sunt 
Christi: Accipite, et bibite ex hoc omnes; hic est enim 
sanguis meus. Et vide singula. 

23. Qui pridie, inquit, quam pateretur, in sanctis 
manibus suis accepit panem. Antequam consecratur, 


200 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


panis est; ubi autem verba Christi accesserint, corpus 
est Christi. Denique audi dicentem: Accipite, et edite 
ex eo omnes, hoc est enim corpus meum. Et ante verba 
Christi, calix est, vini et aquae plenus: ubi verba Christi 
operata fuerint, ibi sanguis Christi efficitur, qui plebem 
redemit. Ergo vidite quantis generibus potens est sermo 
Christi universa convertere. Deinde ipse Dominus Jesus 
testificatur nobis quod corpus suum accipiamus et san- 
guinem. Numquid debemus de ejus fide et testificatione 
dubitare ? 

24. Jam redi mecum ad propositionem meam.  Mag- 
num quidem et venerabile, quod manna Judaeis pluit e 
coelo: sed intellige. Quid est amplius, manna de coelo, 
an corpus Christi? Corpus utique Christi, qui auctor 
est coeli. Deinde manna qui manducavit, mortuus est: 
qui manducaverit hoc corpus, fiet ei remissio peccatorum, 
et non morietur in aeternum. 

25. Ergo non otiose dicis tu; Amen, jam in spiritu 
confitens quod accipias corpus Christi. Dicit tibi sacer- 
dos: Corpus Christi; et tu dicis: Amen, hoc est, verum. 


Quod confitetur lingua, teneat affectus. 
P. L. xvi., 462-464. 


IV., vi., 26-27 

26. Ut scias autem hoc esse sacramentum, hujus 
figura ante praecessit. Deinde quantum sit sacramentum, 
cognosce. Vide quid dieat: Quotiescunque hoc jeceritis, 
toties commemorationem mei facietis, donec iterum adveniam. 

27. Et sacerdos dicit: Ergo memores gloriosissimae 
ejus passionis, et ab inferis resurrectionis, et in coelum 
ascensionis, offerimus tibi hanc immaculatam — hostiam, 
rationabilem hostiam, incruentam | hostiam, hunc. panem 
sanctum, εἰ calicem vitae aeternae: εἰ petimus et precamur, 
ut hanc oblationem suscipias in sublimi altari tuo per manus 
angelorum tuorum, sicul suscipere dignatus es munera 
pueri tui justi Abel, et sacrificium patriarchae nostri Abra- 


hae, et quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos M elchisedech. 
| P. L. xvi., 464. 


APPENDIX 261 


John Chrysostom. 347-407 a.p. 
De Sacerdotio, Bk. III., ch. 4 
Βούλει καὶ ἐξ ἑτέρου θαύματος τῆς ἁγιστείας ἰδεῖν τὴν 
ὑπερβολήν: ὑπόγραψόν μοι Ἡλίαν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς. καὶ 
τὸν 'ἄπειρον ὄχλον περιεστῶτα, καὶ τὴν θυσίαν ἐπὶ τῶν 
λίθων κειμένην, καὶ πάντας μὲν ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ τοὺς λοιπούς, 
^ ^ ^ ^ , 
καὶ πολλῇ τῇ σιγῇ. µόνον δὲ τὸν προφήτην εὐχόμενον - 
= > s ^ / , "m^ , "^ , M ^ e ^ 
εἶτα ἐξαίφνης τὴν φλόγα ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν ἐπὶ τὸν ἱερεῖον 
ῥιπτομένην * θαυμαστὰ ταῦτα, καὶ πάσης ἐκπλήξεως γέ. 
µοντα " µετάβηθι τοίνυν ἐκεῖθεν ἐπὶ τὰ νῦν τελούμενα καὶ 
οὐ θαυμαστὰ µόνον ὄψει, ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶσαν ἔκπληξιν ὑπερ- 
/ e ^ ©. € , , £^ / > \ 
Baivovra. “ἕστηκε γαρ ο ἱερεύς, οὐ πῦρ καταφέρων, ἀλλὰ 
^ ^ Nu \ \ , » > \ \ ^ 
τὸ [Πνεῦμα τὸ "Αγιον * καὶ τὴν ἰκετηρίαν ἐπὶ πολὺ ποιεῖται, 
, eu \ ” » ^ , \ 
οὐχ ίνα τις λαμπας ἄνωθεν ἀφεθεῖσα καταναλώση τὰ προ- 
κείµενα, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἡ χάρις ἐπιπεσοῦσα τῇ θυσία δι ἐκείνης 
μενα, 7 χαρ n a 7) 
^ c / > , , \ > / / 
τὰς ἁπάντων ἀνάψῃ ψυχάς, καὶ ἀργυρίου λαμπροτέρας 
ἀποδείξῃ πεπυρωμένου. P. 6. xlviii., 642. 
Ibid., VL, 4 
Ὅταν δὲ καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ’Ayıov καλῇ καὶ τὴν φρικω- 
δεστάτην ἐπιτελῇ θυσίαν, καὶ τοῦ κοινοῦ πάντων συνεχῶς 
ἐφάπτηται Δεσπότου, ποῦ τάξομεν αὐτόν, εἰπέ uoi; . 
ἐννόησον γὰρ ὁποίας τὰς ταῦτα διακονουμένας χεῖρας εἶναι 
χρή, ὁποίαν τὴν γλῶτταν τὴν ἐκεῖνα προχέουσαν τὰ 
ῥήματα. τίνος δὲ οὐ καθαρωτέραν καὶ ἁγιωτέραν τὴν τοσοῦ- 
τον Πνεῦμα ὑποδεξαμένην ψυχήν. P. G. xlviii., 681. 


D 


De coemeterio et cruce, 3 
Τί ποιεῖς, ἄνθρωπε: ὅταν ἑστήκη πρὸ τῆς τραπέζης ὁ 
ἱερεύς. τὰς χεῖρας ἀνατείνων εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν, καλῶν τὸ 
Πνεῦμα "Άγιον τοῦ παραγενέσθαι καὶ ἅψεσθαι τῶν προ- 
κειμένων, πολλὴ ἡσυχία, πολλὴ σιγή. Ὅταν διδῷ τὴν 
χάριν τὸ llveüua, ὅταν κατέλθῃ, ὅταν ἅψηται τῶν προκει- 
μένων, ὅταν ἴδης τὸ πρόβατον ἐσφαγιασμένον καὶ ἀπηρτισ- 
μένον, τότε θόρυβον. τότε ταραχήν, τότε φιλονεικίαν, τότε 
λοιδορίαν, ἐπεισάγεις ; Ρ. 6. xlix., 397, 398. 


262 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Hom. in Pentecost. 1. 

> , , , e δὲ > Ν et N , 

Ἀναμιμνήσκοντες αὐτούς, ὅτι οὐδὲν αὐτὸς ὁ παρὼν πράτ- 
΄ , 
τει, οὐδὲ ἀνθρωπίνης ἐστι φύσεως κατορθώματα τὰ προκεί- 
μενα δῶρα, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ τοῦ Πνεύματος χάρις παροῦσα, καὶ 
πᾶσιν ἐφιπταμένη, τὴν μυστικὴν ἐκείνην κατασκευάζει 
/ , \ xy D , use , > 3: e , 
θυσίαν εἰ γὰρ καὶ ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν ὁ παρών, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ Θεός 
ἐστιν ὁ ἐνεργῶν δι’ αὐτοῦ: μὴ τοίνυν πρόσεχε TH φύσει τοῦ 
r s » > 5 / ^ E \ Be > N > , 
ὁρωμένου, ἀλλ᾽ ἐννόει τὴν χάριν τὴν ἀόρατον * οὐδὲν ἀνθρώ- 
πινον τῶν γενομένων ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ τούτῳ βήματι. 
P. G.1., 459. 


Hom. xlv. in Joan. 
Καὶ γὰρ ἐκείνη ἡ σὰρξ τοῦ Κυρίου διὰ τὸν Θεὸν Λόγον 
ἄρτος ἐστίν: ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ οὗτος ὁ ἄρτος διὰ τὸ ἐπιφοιτᾶν 
αὐτῷ Ilvevua, ἄρτος οὐράνιος γίνεται. P. G. lix., 253: 


Hom. ii. on 2 Timoth. 

€ \ € , , > - ^ / Φ 

Η προσφορὰ ἡ αὐτή ἐστι. κἀν τυχὼν προσενέγκῃ. κἄν 

^ ἃ ε - 
Παῦλος, κἂν Πέτρος: ἡ αὐτή ἐστιν, ἣν ὁ Χριστὸς τοῖς 
μαθηταῖς ἔδωκε, καὶ ἣν νῦν οἱ ἱερεῖς ποιοῦσιν ' οὐδὲν αὕτη 
ἐλάττων ἐκείνης. ὅτι καὶ ταύτην οὐκ ἄνθρωποι ἁγιάζουσιν, 
, > SEN © \ 2 s € , es \ N CF: 
ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸς ὁ καὶ ἐκείνην ἁγιάσας. “Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ ῥήματα. 
eu t N , / \ > , , e e [4 1 \ 
ἅπερ ὁ Θεὸς ἐφθέγξατο, τὰ αὐτά ἐστιν, ἅπερ ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ 
^ , eu None: \ e , rs] 
νῦν λέγει, οὕτω καὶ 7) προσφορὰ 7) αὐτή ἐστιν. 

Ἑ, Glxii:, 612: 


Hom. i., de prodit. Jud., 6 

II dpeo tv ὁ Χριστός, καὶ νῦν ἐκεῖνος ὁ τὴν τράπεζαν δια- 
κοσμήσας ἐκείνην, οὗτος καὶ ταύτην διακοσμεῖ νῦν. Οὐδὲ 
γὰρ ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν ὁ ποιῶν τὰ προκείµενα γενέσθαι σῶμα 

\ © ^ > > > Ν € \ c \ e ^ 
καὶ αἷμα Χριστοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸς ὁ σταυρωθεὶς ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν 
"d ^ ^ u 
Χριστός. Σχῆμα πληρῶν ἕστηκεν ὁ ἱερεύς. τὰ ῥήματα 
φθεγγόμενος ἐκεῖνα" ἡ δὲ δύναμις καὶ ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ 
1 ες "n , / > Ἂς ^ .. s Lol Ν en 
ἐστι. "' Γοῦτό μού ἐστι τὸ σῶμα." φησί: Tovro TO ῥῆμα 

/ \ / 4 \ θ / e TE, 

μεταρρυθµίζει τὰ "poke(ueva* kai καθάπερ ἡ φωνὴ ἐκείνη 
ἡ λέγουσα > “ Αὐξάνεσθε, καὶ πληθύνεσθε, καὶ πληρώσατε 


APPENDIX 263 


^ ^ 33.72 s \ es \ \ \ ^ / / 
τὴν γῆν. ἐρρέθη μὲν ἅπαξ, διὰ παντὸς δὲ τοῦ χρόνου γίνε- 
ται ἔργῳ ἐνδυναμοῦσα τὴν φύσιν τὴν ἡμετέραν πρὸς παιδο- 
. af ^ e \ e x e eu ^ » € / 
ποιῖαν ' οὕτω kai ἡ φωνὴ αὕτη ἅπαξ λεχθεῖσα xa ἑκάσ- 
την τράπεζαν ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις ἐξ ἐκείνου μέχρι σήμερον 
καὶ μέχρι τῆς αὐτοῦ παρουσίας. τὴν θυσίαν ἀπηρτισμένην 
, , > "5 
ἐργάζεται. P. 6. xlix., 380. . 


Hom. ii., de prodit. Jud., 6 
, ^ ^ 

Πάρεστιν καὶ νῦν ὁ Χριστὸς τὴν τράπεζαν κοσμῶν * οὐ 
γὰρ ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν ὁ ποιῶν τὰ προκείµενα γενέσθαι σῶμα 
καὶ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Σχῆμα πληρῶν µόνον ἕστηκεν ὁ 
Ὁ , \ [4 [4 € M , \ c ΄ / 
ἱερεύς, καὶ δέησιν προσφέρει" ἡ δὲ χάρις καὶ ἡ δύναμίς 
, ^ © me / 1 / ος ^ / r3 N 
ἐστιν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡ πάντα ἐργαζομένη. ‘ Τοῦτό μού ἐστιν τὸ 

^ ^ N ^ 
σῶμα, φησί. Τοῦτο τὸ ῥῆμα τὰ προκείμενα µεταρρυθ- 
μίζει. καὶ καθάπερ ἐκείνη ἡ φωνή. ἡ λέγουσα. “ Αὐξάνεσθε, 
καὶ πληθύνεσθε, καὶ πληρώσατε τὴν γῆν." ῥῆμα ἣν, καὶ 
ἐγένετο ἔργον, ἐνδυναμοῦσα τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην φύσιν πρὸς 

“Ὁ č e \ er e , ς / \ 
παιδοποιῖαν ' οὕτω καὶ αὕτη ἡ φωνή. ἡ λέγουσα. διαπαντὸς 
αὔξει τῇ χάριτι τοὺς ἀξίως μετέχοντας. 
P. G. xlix., 389, 390. 


Ephraem Syrus. c. 308-c. 378 A.D. 
De Sacerdotio 

e \ € , > , ιά ^ > Ν ^ > 
H δὲ ἱερωσύνη εὐπαρρησιάστως ὑψιπετεῖ ἀπὸ γῆς eis 
οὐρανόν, ἄχρις ἂν θεωρήσῃ αὐτὸν τὸν ἀόρατον" καὶ προσκυ- 
výcaca εὔχεται. . . ὅπως τὸ παράκλητον Πνεῦμα συγ- 

/ X77 Se , ^ \ 2 (ον / Nod 
καθέλθῃ. καὶ ἁγιάσῃ δῶρα, τὰ ἐν γῇ προκείμενα " καὶ ὅταν 
^ N \ , » / \ 
προσκομιασθῆ μυστήρια φοβερὰ πλήρης ἀθανασίας διὰ 
τοῦ προεστῶτος ἱερέως ποιοῦντος πρεσβείαν ὑπὲρ πάντων. 
τότε δὴ προσέρχονται ψυχαὶ διὰ τῶν φρικτῶν μυστηρίων 
καθαρμὸν λαμβάνουσαι τῶν σπίλων * ἴδετε, φιλόθεοι, πῶς 

2. , ^ \ , , \ ^ m^ , \ [4 > , ^ 
οὐκ ἐνεργοῦσι τὰ δύο ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. εἰ μὴ 7) οὐράνια ψῆφος 

παραγένηται καὶ ἁγιάσει τὰ δῶρα. 
Opera omnia, ed. Pet. Ben., gr.-lat., iii., 2, 3. 


264 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


De sanct. et viv. ch. sacr. 


Ne putes quem hic panem quodque vinum vides, 
eadem haec existere. Minime frater: nolito hoc credere. 
Precibus sacerdotis Sanctique Spiritus adventu panis 
fit corpus, vinum sanguls. . . . Quomodo is quaeso ipse 
efficere non possit, ut panis ipsum corpus Christi, vinum 
sanguis ipsius sit? Principio terrae mandavit herbam 
producere; quae propterea in hanc usque horam, pluviam 
mittente coelo, vi divini, quod initio accepit, mandati, 
herbam emittit. Jam vero simili modo Deus dicit, “ Hoc 
est corpus meum," Πιο est sanguis meus," et “Hoc 
facite in memoriam mel." Cum igitur omnia omnipotenti 
ejus Jussu fiant: usque dum ipse veniat, prout ipse ait; 
" dum venio: " cumque pluvia in terram decidente, gramen 
revirescat: tum vero et spiritualis haec pluvia, hoc est 
Spiritus Sanctus, sacerdotis precibus ipsius efficacia ac- 
cedens panem hune corpus et vinum sanguinem aperte 
efficit. Opera omnia, ed. Pet. Ben., gr.-lat., iii., 608, 609. 


Explanatio in Ezek. x. 


Istae prunae lineisque amictus vir illas extrahens et 
super populum profundens, figura fuit Dei sacerdotum, 
per quos prunae viventis et vivificantis corporis Domini 
nostri dispensantur; porro dum alter angelus manum por- 
rigit, prunas legit et viro lineis induto mox tradit, mys- 
terium innuit, non ab ipso sacerdote ex pane fieri posse 
corpus, sed ab alio; hie est autem Spiritus Sanctus; 
sacerdotem itaque velut mediatorem solummodo manus 
attollere, labiisque preces et orationes quasi supplicem. 
servum offere. Opera omnia, ed. Pet. Ben., syr.-lat., ii., 175. 


Peter II. of Alexandria. T9381 a.p. 
Theodoret, Hist. Ecel., iv., 19 


. . τοῦ ἁγίου θυσιαστηρίου ἔνθα κάθοδον τοῦ Αγίου 
Πνεύματος ἐπικαλούμεθα. P. G. Ixxxii., 1169. 


APPENDIX 265 


Gregory of Nyssa. c. 330—395 A.p. 
De Bapt. Christi 
€ » [4 » » / , , re , x 
O ἄρτος πάλιν, ἄρτος ἔστι τέως κοινός, ἀλλ᾽ ὅταν αὐτὸν 
τὸ μυστήριον ἱερουργήση, σῶμα Χριστοῦ λέγεταί τε καὶ 
γίνεται ' οὕτω καὶ τὸ μυστικὸν ἔλαιον, οὕτως ὁ οἶνος, 
, / \ „ ” \ ^ , / ^ \ ς 
ὀλίγου τινὸς ἄξια ὄντα πρὸ τῆς εὐλογίας. μετὰ τὸν ἁγιασ- 
μὸν τοῦ Πνεύματος, ἑκάτερον αὐτῶν ἐνεργεῖ διαφόρως. 
P. G. xlyi., 582. 
Epist. can. ad Let. epis. Melit. 
Ei τις ἠρνήσατο τὴν ἐν Χριστῷ πίστιν αὐτομολή- 
np 7) 7] = ρ D a cr μ n 
σας ἐφάνη " ὁ μὲν ἑκουσίως ἐπὶ τὸ τοιοῦτον ὁρμήσας κακόν. 
εἶτα καταγνοὺς ἑαυτοῦ, χρόνον τὸν τῆς μετανοίας ἔχει ὅλον 
τὸν τῆς ζωῆς αὐτοῦ" οὐδέποτε γὰρ μυστικῆς ἐπιτελουμένης 
εὐχῆς. μετὰ τοῦ λαοῦ προσκυνῆσαι τὸν Θεὸν καταξιοῦται. 
3 \ N. / by » ^ N / ^ € 
ἀλλὰ κατὰ μόνας μὲν εὔξεται, τῆς δὲ κοινωνίας τῶν ἁγιασ- 
μάτων καθόλου ἀλλότριος ἔσται ἐν δὲ τῇ ὥρᾳ τῆς ἐξόδου 
4 t 
> ^ ^ ^ , 
αὐτοῦ, τότε τῆς τοῦ ἁγιάσματος ἀξιωθήσεται. 
ἘΠ Ge σαν. 22h. 


In laudem fratris Basilii 

[7 e ΄ ^ , ^ \ ^ e , 

H ἱερωσύνη τοῦ διδασκάλου μιμεῖται τὰ τῆς ἱερωσύνης 
τοῦ προφήτου ᾿Ηλιοὺ αἰνίγματα, διὰ τοῦ τρισσεύειν ἐν τῷ 
λόγῳ τῆς πίστεως τὸ οὐράνιον πῦρ πρὸς τὰς ἱερουργίας 
ἐφελκομένη - πῦρ δὲ τὴν τοῦ Αγίου Πνεύματος δύναμιν 
καλεῖσθαι πολλαχῇ παρὰ τῆς γραφῆς ἐδιδάχθημεν. 

Ῥ. 6. xlvi., 805. 


no 


Oratio Catechetica, 33 
> ^ 9 4 \ ^ , , , Ν 
Ἐπειδὰν οὖν τούτων καὶ τῶν τοιούτων ἀκούσωσιν καὶ 
^ \ / es > \ N ^ A , 
προδιδαχθῶσι τὸν τρόπον. ὅτι εὐχὴ πρὸς Θεὸν καὶ χάριτος 
> / > / x er \ / > \ > T M 
οὐρανίας ἐπίκλησις καὶ ὕδωρ καὶ πίστις ἐστὶ δι ὧν τὸ 
τῆς ἀναγεννήσεως πληροῦται μυστήριον. δυσπειθῶς ἔχουσι 
πρὸς τὸ φαινόμενον βλέποντες. ὡς οὐ συμβαῖνον τῇ ἐπαγ- 
M ^ ^ 
γελίᾳ τὸ σωματικῶς ἐνεργούμενον.  IHós γάρ. φασίν. εὐχὴ 
καὶ δυνάμεως θείας ἐπίκλησις ἐπὶ τοῦ ὕδατος γινομένη 
ζωῆς ἀρχηγὸς τοῖς μυηθεῖσι γίνεται : 
ed. Srawley, pp. 128-124, P.G. xlv., 84. 


266 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Oratio Catechetica, 36 
Τίς yàp πάρεστι πόνος τῷ πράγματι, πιστεῦσαι παντα- 
^ N 5 ^ » ^ ^ 
χοῦ τὸν Θεὸν εἶναι. ἐν πᾶσι δὲ ὄντα. παρεῖναι καὶ τοῖς ἐπι- 
καλουμένοις τὴν ζωτικὴν αὐτοῦ δύναμιν, παρόντα δὲ τὸ 
οἰκεῖον ποιεῖν ; ed. Srawley, p. 140. P. 6. xlv., 92. 


Ibid., 37 
\ ^ 
Τὸ γὰρ πάντων ἴδιον καὶ ἐπ᾽ ἐκείνης τῆς σαρκὸς ὦμολο- 
ϱ > ^ N n ^ ^ 
γήθη, ὅτι ἄρτῳ κἀκεῖνο τὸ σῶμα διεκρατεῖτο, τὸ δὲ σῶμα 
^ , , ^ ^ , \ \ \ > / 
τῇ ἐνοικήσει τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγου πρὸς τὴν θεικὴν ἀξίαν µετε- 
^ = ^ Ν ^ ^ ^ 
ποιήθη. Καλῶς οὖν καὶ νῦν τὸν τῷ Λόγῳ τοῦ Θεοῦ ayıado- 
μενον ἄρτον εἰς σῶμα τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγου μεταποιεῖσθαι 
πιστεύομεν. Καὶ γὰρ ἐκεῖνο τὸ σῶμα ἄρτος τῇ δυνάμει ἦν. 
ἡγιάσθη δὲ τῇ ἐπισκηνώσει τοῦ Λόγου τοῦ σκηνώσαντος 
ἐν τῇ σαρκί. Οὐκοῦν ὅθεν ὁ ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ σώματι μετα- 
ποιηθεὶς ἄρτος εἰς θείαν μετέστη δύναμιν, διὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ 
καὶ νῦν τὸ ἴσον γίνεται. "Exel τε γὰρ ἡ τοῦ Λόγου χάρις 
2 / \ ^ e 5 ^y ΄ 5 \ 
ἅγιον ἐποίει TO σῶμα © ἐκ τοῦ ἄρτου ἡ σύστασις ἦν, καὶ 
τρόπον τινὰ καὶ αὐτὸ ἄρτος ἣν: ἐνταῦθά τε ὡσαύτως ὁ 
ἄρτος, καθώς φησιν ὁ ἀπόστολος, “ ἁγιάζεται διὰ λόγου 
Θεοῦ καὶ ἐντεύξεως." οὐ διὰ βρώσεως προιὼν εἰς τὸ σῶμα 
^ N N ^ ^ 
γενέσθαι τοῦ Λόγου, ἀλλ᾽ εὐθὺς πρὸς τὸ σῶμα διὰ τοῦ 
Λόγου μεταποιούµενος. καθὼς εἴρηται ὑπὸ τοῦ Λόγου ὅτι 
* Τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμα μου... . ᾿Επεὶ οὖν καὶ τοῦτο τὸ 
/ € , > / X Ν \ Ais © ^ 
µέρος ἡ θεοδόχος ἐκείνη σὰρξ πρὸς τὴν σύστασιν ἑαυτῆς 
^ S. "^ 
παρεδέξατο, ὁ δὲ φανερωθεὶς Θεὸς διὰ τοῦτο κατέμιξεν 
[4 \ ^ > [4 7 e A ^ , / 
ἑαυτὸν τῇ ἐπικήρῳ φύσει, ἵνα τῇ τῆς θεότητος κοινωνίᾳ 
^ A , , 2, ^ ^ 
συναποθεωθῃ τὸ ἀνθρώπινον, τούτου χάριν πᾶσι τοῖς πεπι- 
/ ^ , ΄, ^ , © \ 2 / \ n^ 
στευκόσι τῇ οἰκονομίᾳ τῆς χάριτος ἑαυτὸν ἐνσπείρει διὰ τῆς 
, 3 N » , ^ 
σαρκός, ἣς ἡ σύστασις ἐξ οἴνου τε καὶ ἄρτου ἐστί, τοῖς 
σώμασι τῶν πεπιστευκότων κατακιρνάμενος, ὡς ἂν τῇ πρὸς 
X , , id , \ ς op ^ > / s 
τὸ ἀθάνατον ἑνώσει kal ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀφθαρσίας μέτοχος 
/ ^ \ n ^ > s , \ 
γένοιτο. Ταῦτα δὲ διδωσι τῇ τῆς εὐλογίας δυνάμει πρὸς 
ἐκεῖνο µεταστοιχειώσας τῶν φαινομένων τὴν φύσιν. 
ed. Srawley, pp. 148-152. P. 6. xlv., 97. 


APPENDIX 267 


Theophilus of Alexandria 
Paschal letter, 402 A.D. 

Dieit [Origenes] enim, Spiritum Sanctum non operari 
ea quae inanima sunt, nec ad irrationabilia pervenire. 
Quod asserens non recogitat, aquas in baptismate mysticas 
adventu Saneti Spiritus consecrari, panemque dominicum, 
quo Salvatoris corpus ostenditur (= ἀναδείκνυται) et quem 
frangimus in sanctificationem nostri et sacrum calicem 
(quae in mensa ecclesiae collocantur et utique inanima 
sunt) per invocationem et adventum Sancti Spiritus 
sanctificari (--διὰ τῆς ἐπικλήσεως καὶ ἐπιφοιτήσεως τοῦ Αγίου 
Πνεύματος ἁγιάζεσθαι). P. L. xxii., 801. 


Nilus. Το, 430 a.p. 
Epist. ad Phil. Schol., i., 44 

, , \ 4 , 0 M , 

Ἐκ παπύρου καὶ κὀλλης χάρτης κατασκευασθεὶς χάρτης 
ψιλὸς καλεῖται' ἐπὰν δὲ ὑπογραφὴν δέξηται βασιλέως 
δῆλος ὡς σάκρα ὀνομάζεται. οὕτως μοι νόει καὶ τὰ θεῖα 
μυστήρια πρὸ μὲν τῆς ἐντεύξεως τοῦ ἱερέως καὶ τῆς καθόδου 

^ € 4 ’΄ M » c / \ 5 
τοῦ Αγίου Πνεύματος. ψιλὸν ἄρτον ὑπάρχειν καὶ οἶνον 

\ A / \ \ N AC > s > , 
κοινὸν τὰ προκείμενα, μετὰ δὲ τὰς φοβερὰς ἐκείνας ἐπικλή- 
σεις καὶ τὴν ἐπιφοίτησιν τοῦ προσκυνητοῦ καὶ ζωοποιοῦ 

\ > ^ , > » \ » \ \ 
καὶ ἀγαθοῦ Πνεύματος οὐκ ἔτι ψιλὸν ἄρτον καὶ κοινὸν 
οἶνον τὰ ἐπιτεθεμένα TH ἁγίᾳ τραπέζη. ἀλλὰ σῶ ὶ 

μ ἢ ἁγίᾳ τραπέζῃ, ἀλλὰ σῶμα καὶ 
αἷμα τίμιον, καὶ ἄχραντον εἶναι Χριστοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῶν 
ἁπάντων, καθαρίζον ἀπὸ παντὸς μολυσμοῦ τοὺς μεταλαμ- 
βάνοντας φόβῳ καὶ πόθῳ πολλῷ. P. G. Ixxix., 104. 


Augustine. 354-430 A.D. 
Hom. 227, in die Pasch. iv. 

Panis ille guem videtis in altari, sanctificatus per 
Verbum Dei, corpus est Christi. Calix 1116, imo guod 
habet calix, sanctificatum per Verbum Dei sanguis 
Christi. Attendite ergo, et videte, guia venturus est 
Pentecosto Spiritus Sanctus, . . . Accedit ergo Spiritus 


268 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Sanctus, post aquam ignis; efficimini panis, quod est 
corpus Christi. 

Tenetis sacramenta ordine suo. Primo, post oratio- 
nem admonemini sursum habere cor .. . respondetis 
"Habemus ad Dominum" . . . sequitur episcopus, vel 
presbyter qui offert: “Gratias agamus Domino Deo 
nostro.” ... Et vos attestamini, “Dignum et jus- 
tum est." . . . Deinde post sanctificationem sacrificii 
Dei... ubi peracta est sanctificatio, dicimus Domi- 
nicam orationem. P. L. xxxviii., 1099-1101. 


Sermones inediti. III. De Sacramento altaris ad infantes 
Ipse namque sua jàm propinquante passione, cum 
Pascha faceret cum Discipulis suis, acceptum panem, 
benedixit, et ait: Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vobis 
tradetur. Similiter benedictum calicem dedit dicens: 
Hic est sanguis meus Novi Testamenti, qui pro multis 
eff undetur in remissionem peccatorum. P.L. xlvi., 905-906. 


Ibid. VI. Item de Sacramento altaris ad infantes 
1. Hoc quod videtis panis est, et vinum; sed iste 
panis, et hoc vinum accedente Verbo fit corpus, et sanguis 
Verbi. 


3. Et inde jam [sequuntur] quae aguntur in precibus 
sanctis, quas audituri estis, ut accedente Verbo fiat 
corpus et sanguis Christi. Nam tolle Verbum, panis est 
et vinum. Adde Verbum, et jam aliud est. Et ipsum 
aliud quid est? Corpus Christi et sanguis Christi. Tolle 
ergo Verbum, panis est, et vinum. Adde Verbum, et 
fiet sacramentum. Ad hoc dicitis: Amen. Amen dicere 


subscribere est. Amen latine interpretatur Verum. 
P. L. xlvi., 834-835, 856. 


Epist. exlix., ad Paulin., 16 


Eligo in his verbis hoc intelligere, quod omnis vel paene 
omnis frequentat ecclesia: ut precationes accipiamus 


APPENDIX 269 


dietas, quas facimus in celebratione sacramentorum, 
antequam illud quod est in Domini mensa incipiat bene- 
dici: orationes, cum benedicitur et sanctificatur, et ad 
distribuendum comminuitur: quam totam petitionem 


fere omnis eeclesia Dominiea oratione concludit. 
P. L. xxxiii., 636-637. 


De Trinitate, Bk. IIL, ch. iv., $ 10 


Apostolus Paulus . . . potuit tamen significando prae- 
dicare Dominum Jesum Christum, aliter per linguam 
suam, aliter per epistolam, aliter per sacramentum cor- 
poris et sanguinis ejus. Nec linguam, quippe ejus nec 
membranas, nec atramentum, nec significantes sonos 
lingua editos, nec signa litterarum conscripta pelliculis, 
corpus Christi et sanguinem dicimus, sed illud tantum, 
quod ex fructibus terrae acceptum et prece mystica conse- 
eratum, rite sumimus ad salutem spiritalem in memoriam 
pro nobis dominicae passionis. Quod eum per manus 
hominum ad illam visibilem speciem perducitur, non 
sanctificatur, ut sit tam magnum sacramentum, nisi 
operante invisibiliter Spiritu Dei. 

P. L. xlii., 873-874. 


Jerome. 345-420 A.n. 

Epist. exlvi., ad Evang. 
Nam cum Apostolus perspicue doceat eosdem esse 
presbyteros quos episcopos, quid patitur mensarum et 
viduarum minister, ut supra eos se tumidus effereat, ad 


quorum preces Christi corpus sanguisgue conficitur? 
ἘΠῚ, xxl... 1198: 


In Soph. iii. 

Sacerdotes guogue gui eucharistiae serviunt et san- 
guinem Domini populis ejus dividunt, impie agunt in 
legem Christi putantes εὐχαριστίαν imprecantis facere 
verba, non vitam, et necessariam esse tantum solemnem 
orationem, et non sacerdotum merita, de quibus dieitur: 


270 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


“Et sacerdos, in quo fuerit macula, non accedat offerre 
oblationes Domino.’ Ῥ. L. xxv., 1375. 


The Greek Jerome. 1. c. 400 a.p. 
Com. Christ. eui. util. 

Ὅθεν καὶ πληροφορεῖται ὁ Χριστιανός, οὐ ψιλὸν ἄρτον 
καὶ οἶνον μεταλαμβάνειν, ἀλλὰ σῶμα ἀληθῶς καὶ αἷμα τοῦ 
Υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ, Πνεύματι Aviv ἡγιασμένον. 

P. G. xl., 864. 


Isidore of Pelusium. Το. 434 A.n. 
Epist. i., 109 

Ei ὁ Θεὸς καὶ Σωτὴρ ἡμῶν ἐνανθρωπήσας παρέδωκε, 
συμπληρωτικὸν εἶναι τῆς θείας Τριάδος τὸ Αγιον Πνεῦμα 
καὶ ἐν τῇ ἐπικλήσει τοῦ ἁγίου βαπτίσματος σὺν llarpi 
καὶ Tia, ὡς ἐλευθεροῦν τῶν ἁμαρτίων ἀριθμούμενον, καὶ 
ἐπὶ τραπέζης τῆς μυστικῆς τὸν ἄρτον τὸν κοινὸν σῶμα 
ἰδικὸν τῆς αὐτοῦ σαρκώσεως ἀποφαῖνον: πῶς διδάσκεις. 
ἐμβρόντητε, ποιητὸν ἢ κτιστὸν ἢ τῆς δούλης φύσεως εἶναι, 
ἀλλ᾽ οὐ τῆς δεσποτικῆς καὶ δημιουργοῦ καὶ βασιλίδος 
οὐσίας σύγγενες καὶ ὁμοούσιον τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ "Αγιον : 

P. G. Ixxviii., 256. 


Epist. i., 313 
Mn ὕβριζε τὴν θείαν λειτουργίαν, μὴ ἀτίμαζε τὴν τῶν 
^ , / 3 N / € © 
καρπῶν εὐλογίαν. . . . ᾿Αλλὰ μεμνημένος ὡς αἷμα X pi- 
στοῦ τὴν τούτου ἐπαρχὴν τὸ θεῖον ἐργάζεται Πνεῦμα οὕτως 
αὐτῷ κέχρησο ὡς ἀσθενής. P. G. Ixxviii., 364. 


Cyril of Alexandria. +444 a.p. 
In Luc. xxii., 19 
Εὐχαριστεῖ μὲν τουτέστιν Ev σχήματι προσευχῆς δια- 
λέγεται τῷ Θεῷ Πατρὶ κοινωνὸν ὥσπερ αὐτὸν καὶ συνευδο- 
κητὴν ἀποφαίνων τῆς δοθησοµένης ἡμῖν εὐλογίας ζωοποιοῦ: 
πᾶσα γὰρ χάρις καὶ πᾶν δώρημα τέλειον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς ἔρχεται 
παρὰ Πατρος δι Υἱοῦ ἐν ᾿Αγίῳ Πνεύματι" τύπος δὲ ἣν τὸ 


APPENDIX 241 


δρώμενον εἰς ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς τῆς ὀφειλούσης προσανατείνεσθαι 
λιτῆς εἰ μέλλοι προτίθεσθαι παρ᾽ ἡμῶν τῆς μυστικῆς καὶ 
ζωοποιοῦ δωροφορίας ἡ χάρις ὃ δὴ καὶ δρᾶν εἰθίσμεθα. 

P. G. Ixxii., 908. 


In Luc. ix., 16 


Βλέπει τε εἰς οὐρανόν. οἷον τὴν ἄνωθεν εὐλογίαν αἰτῶν. 
P. G. Ixxii., 645. 


In Joan. Lib. III., ο. iv. (ch. vi., 11) 
e A "3 ^ / > / , \ ^ » ^ 
Οὕτως καὶ ἐνταῦθα TO, εὐλογήσας ἐπὶ τῶν ἄρτων, νοεῖται. 
Σημειωτέον ὅτι, ἀντὶ τοῦ εὐχαριστήσας, εὐλογήσας, εἶπεν 
ὁ Ματθαῖος * οὐδαμῶς δὲ διαφωνήσει τῶν ἁγίων ἡ ἔκδοσις - 
ἐν γὰρ ἀποδείξει τὸ συναμφότερον ὁ llaúNos, εἰπών - * ὅτι 
^ ^ / \ > N > / > , / 
πᾶν βρῶμα καλόν, καὶ οὐδὲν ἀπόβλητον, μετ᾽ εὐχαριστίας 
λαμβάνομεν: ἁγιάζεται γὰρ διὰ λόγου Θεοῦ καὶ ἐντεύξεως +” 
^ N ^ 
εὐλογεῖται γὰρ πάντως τὸ ἁγιαζόμενον διὰ τῆς ἐν ἐντεύξει 
προσευχῆς, ἣν ἐπὶ ταῖς τραπέζαις ἀεὶ ποιεῖν εἰθίσμεθα. 
P..G. Ixxili., 456. 


In Matt. xxvi., 26 seg. 
e \ \ e ^ , / ^ > m ἐν 
Αμα δὲ καὶ ἡμῖν τύπον δίδους πρῶτον εὐχαριστεῖν καὶ 
er ^ N » \ / \ Ws ^ , - Au 
οὕτω κλᾶν τὸν ἄρτον καὶ διαδιδόναι " διὸ καὶ ἡμεῖς em ὄψεσι 
Θεοῦ τὰ προκείμενα τίθεντες δεόμεθα ἐκτενῶς εἰς εὐλογίαν 
ἡμῖν μεταπλασθῆναι τὴν πνευματικὴν ἵνα μετασχόντες 
αὐτῶν ἁγιασθῶμεν σωματικῶς καὶ πνευματικῶς. 
PS Gs Izxii., 452. 


Epist. oecum. ad Nest. ii. 

Καταγγέλλοντες τὸν κατὰ σάρκα θάνατον τοῦ μονογενοῦς 
Υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ τουτέστιν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, τήν TE ἐκ νεκρῶν 
ἀναβίωσιν καὶ τὴν εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀνάληψιν ὁμολογοῦντες. 
τὴν ἀναίμακτον ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τελοῦμεν θυσίαν, πρόσι- 
μέν τε οὕτω ταῖς μυστικαῖς εὐλογίαις καὶ ἁγιαζόμεθα μέτο- 
χοι γινόμενοι τῆς τε ἁγίας σαρκὸς καὶ τοῦ τιμίου αἵματος 
τοῦ πάντων ἡμῶν Σωτῆρος Χριστοῦ. P. 6. Ixxvii., 113. 


272 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Proclus. Το. 447 a.p. 
De tradit. div. litur. 

Διὰ τοιούτων τοίνυν εὐχῶν τὴν ἐπιφοίτησιν τοῦ ᾿Αγίου 
Πνεῦματος προσεδόκουν. ὅπως τῇ αὐτοῦ θείᾳ παρουσίᾳ τὸν 
προκείμενον εἰς ἱερουργίαν ἄρτον καὶ οἶνον ὕδατι µεμιγ- 
μένον, αὐτὸ ἐκεῖνο τὸ σῶμα καὶ αἷμα τοῦ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν 
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἀποφήνῃ τε καὶ ἀναδείξῃ. — P. G. Ixv., 851. 

Gaudentius of Brescia. fl. c. 420 a.p. 
Serm. ii. 

Ne terrenum putes, quod coeleste effectum est per 
eum qui transit in illud et fecit illud suum corpus et 
sanguinem . . . ut per ignem divini Spiritus id effectum, 
quod annuntiatum est, credas, quia quod accipis, corpus 
est ilius Panis coelestis et sanguis illius sacrae Vitis. 
Nam cum panem consecratum et vinum discipulis suis 
porrigeret, sic ait: “ Hoc est corpus meum," “Hic est 
sanguls meus." P. L. xx., 858. 


Theodoret of Cyrus. +458 a.p. 
Dial. ii., Inconfusus 
Ope. Eine τοίνυν, τὰ μυστικὰ σύμβολα παρὰ τῶν ἱερωμέ- 
νων τῷ Θεῷ προσφερόμενα. τίνων ἐστὶ σύμβολα: 
ΕΡΑΝ. Τοῦ Δεσποτικοῦ σώματός τε καὶ αἵματος. 


Ο. Τοῦ ὄντως σώματος ἢ οὐκ ὄντως: 
E. Tod ὄντως. 
O. "Apıora ' χρὴ γὰρ εἶναι τὸ τῆς εἰκόνος ἀρχέτυπον. 


Καὶ γὰρ οἱ ζωγράφοι τὴν φύσιν μιμοῦνται. καὶ 
τῶν ὁρωμένων γράφουσι τὰς εἰκόνας. 

E ᾿Αληθές. 

©, Ei τοίνυν τοῦ ὄντως σώματος ἀντίτυπά ἐστι τὰ 
θεῖα μυστήρια, σῶμα ἄρα ἐστὶ καὶ νῦν τοῦ 
Δεσπότου τὸ σῶμα, οὐκ εἰς θεότητος φύσιν μετα- 
βληθὲν ἀλλὰ θείας δόξης ἀναπλησθέν. 

E. Eis καιρὸν τὸν περὶ τῶν θείων μυστηρίων ἐκίνη- 
σας λόγον" ἐντεῦθέν σοι γὰρ δείξω τοῦ Δεσπο- 


0. 


APPENDIX 213 


^ , N , t , 4 , 
τικοῦ σώματος τὴν εἰς ἑτέραν φύσιν μεταβολήν. 
᾿Απόκριναι τοίνυν πρὸς τὰς ἐμὰς ἐρωτήσεις. 

᾿᾽Αποκρινοῦμαι. 
^ ^ ^ ^ 
Ti καλεῖς τὸ προσφερόμενον δῶρον πρὸ τῆς ἱερα- 
τικῆς ἐπικλήσεως ; 
^ ^ \ y 
Οὐ χρὴ σαφῶς εἰπεῖν" εἰκὸς γάρ τινας ἁμυή- 
τους παρεῖναι. 
Αἰνιγματωδῶς ἡ ἀπόκρισις ἔστω. 
Τὴν ἐκ τοιῶνδε σπερμάτων τροφήν. 
Τὸ δὲ ἕτερον σύμβολον πῶς ὀνομάζομεν : 
Κοινὸν καὶ τοῦτο ὄνομα πόματος εἶδος σημαῖνον. 
Μετὰ δέ γε τὸν ἁγιασμόν, πῶς ταῦτα προσαγο- 
ρεύεις : 
Σῶμα Χριστοῦ, καὶ αἷμα Χριστοῦ. 
Σι , , ^ , 
Καὶ πιστεύεις γε σώματος Χριστοῦ μεταλαμβάνειν 
καὶ αἵματος ; 
Οὕτω πιστεύω. 
ὍὭσπερ τοίνυν τὰ σύμβολα τοῦ Δεσποτικοῦ σώμα- 
τός τε καὶ αἵματος, ἄλλα μέν εἰσι πρὸ τῆς ἱερα- 
^ , , \ , A , / 
τικῆς ἐπικλήσεως, μετὰ δέ γε τὴν ἐπίκλησιν 
, ^ es , σα Ν 
μεταβάλλεται. καὶ ἕτερα γίνεται ' οὕτω τὸ Δεσ- 
M ^ \ A > r , A , s 
ποτικὸν σῶμα μετὰ τὴν ἀνάληψιν εἰς τὴν οὐσίαν 
µεταβλήθη τὴν θείαν. 
ε / 7 er » Σολ \ N \ 
Ἐάλως, αἷς ὕφηνας ἄρκυσι' οὐδὲ γὰρ μετὰ τὸν 
Ὁ \ X \ ΄ ^ > , > s 
ἁγιασμὸν τὰ μυστικὰ σύμβολα τῆς οἰκείας EEi- 
σταται φύσεως, μένει γὰρ ἐπὶ τῆς προτέρας 
οὐσίας, καὶ τοῦ σχήματος. καὶ τοῦ εἴδους καὶ 
ς © ^ 
ὁρατά εἰσι, καὶ ἁπτά, οἷα καὶ πρότερον ἣν: 
νοεῖται δὲ ἅπερ ἐγένετο καὶ πιστεύεται, καὶ 


προσκυνεῖται, ὡς ἐκεῖνα ὄντα. ἅπερ πιστεύεται. 
P. G. Ixxxiii., 165, 108. 


The Liturgy of St. James 
Brightman, Lit. E. and W., Vol. L, pp. 51-54 


e A = 
Ὕστερον δὲ αὐτὸν τὸν μονογενῆ σου Tiov τὸν Κύριον 


274 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


e ^ , ^ \ , / , \ , e 
ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐξαποστείλας εἰς τὸν κόσμον iva 
> ^ hy \ > , \ > / > , ἃ ^ 
ἐλθὼν τὴν σὴν ἀνανεώσῃ καὶ ἀνεγείρῃ εἰκόνα * ὃς κατελθὼν 
ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν καὶ σαρκωθεὶς ἐκ Πνεύματος Αγίου καὶ 
Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου καὶ θεοτόκου συναναστραφείς τε τοῖς 
> , , N ^ 
ἀνθρώποις πάντα ᾠκονόμησε πρὸς σωτηρίαν τοῦ γένους 
cue / \ \ € ΄ \ \ \ ^ 
ἡμῶν, μέλλων δὲ τὸν ἑκούσιον καὶ ζωοποιὸν διὰ σταυροῦ 
θάνατον ὁ ἀναμάρτητος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν κατα- 

[4 > £e M 5 / ^ x € Ν 
δέχεσθαι. ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ 7 παρεδίδοτο, μᾶλλον δὲ ἑαυτὸν 
παρεδίδου, ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ζωῆς καὶ σωτηρίας 

εἶτα ὁ ἱερεὺς τῇ χειρὶ τὸν ἄρτον κατασχὼν λέγει 
A Ν » , A ^ e / \ > » N > , 

λαβὼν τὸν ἄρτον ἐπὶ τῶν ἁγίων καὶ ἀχράντων καὶ ἀμώμων 

Ν > K , ^ "^ > / ’ N , X 
καὶ ἀθανάτων αὐτοῦ χειρῶν, ἀναβλέψας eis τὸν οὐρανὸν 

\ » / N en ^ Ν s > , lá , 
καὶ ἀναδείξας coi τῷ Θεῷ καὶ Πατρί, εὐχαριστήσας ἁγιά- 
σας κλάσας ἔδωκε τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ μαθηταῖς καὶ ἀποστό- 


λοις εἰπών 
λέγουσιν οἱ διάκονοι 


Eis ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν καὶ εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον 
εἶτα ἐκφωνεῖ 
Λάβετε φάγετε: τοῦτό μου ἐστὶ τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν 
κλώμενον καὶ διδόμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν 
ὁ λαός 
» , 
A uv 
εἶτα λαμβάνει τὸ ποτήριον καὶ λέγει καθ᾽ ἑαυτόν 
€ 4 N \ ^ \ N , N , 
ὡσαύτως μετὰ τὸ δειπνῆσαι λαβὼν τὸ ποτήριον καὶ κερᾶ- 
2 » \ er \ > / , \ > , 
σας ἐξ οἴνου καὶ ὕδατος kal ἀναβλέψας εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν. 
ἀναδείξας σοὶ τῷ Θεῷ καὶ llarpí, ev ] ὑγιά 
0 ¢ pi, εὐχαριστήσας ἁγιάσας 
, , , , € s » ^ e 7 4 A 
εὐλογήσας πλήσας Πνεύματος A γίου ἔδωκε τοῖς ἁγίοις καὶ 
μακαρίοις αὐτοῦ μαθηταῖς εἰπὼν 
[εἶτα ἐκφωνεῖ] 
Πίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες - τοῦτό μου ἐστὶ τὸ αἷμα τὸ τῆς 
^ , Ἀ € N c ^ N ^ 5 , \ 
καινῆς διαθήκης τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ πολλῶν ἐκχεόμενον καὶ 
διαδιδόµενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν 
ὁ λαός 


᾽Αμήν 


APPENDIX 275 


ὁ ἱερεύς 
^ ^ , \ sur. κ η AAA NT, \ ^ 
τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν" ὁσάκις γὰρ ἂν 
ἐσθίητε τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο πίνητε, τὸν 
^ ^ ^ , 
θάνατον ToU υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καταγγέλλετε καὶ τὴν 
> / , κι Ὁ ^ » -* o» 
ἀνάστασιν αὐτοῦ ὁμολογεῖτε ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ 
λέγουσιν οἱ διάκονοι 
Πιστεύομεν καὶ ὁμολογοῦμεν 
ὁ λαός 


N 
Τὸν θάνατόν σου Κύριε καταγγέλλομεν kal τὴν ἀνάστασίν 


σου ὁμολογοῦμεν. 
Ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπισυνάπτει εὐχήν 


Μεμνημένοι οὖν καὶ ἡμεῖς οἱ ἁμαρτωλοὶ τῶν ζωοποιῶν 
αὐτοῦ παθημάτων, τοῦ σωτηρίου σταυροῦ καὶ τοῦ θανάτου 
καὶ τῆς ταφῆς καὶ τῆς τριημέρου ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστάσεως 
καὶ τῆς εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀνόδου καὶ τῆς ἐκ δεξιῶν σου τοῦ 
Θεοῦ καὶ Ἰ]ατρὸς καθέδρας καὶ τῆς δευτέρας ἐνδόξου καὶ 

^ , ^ s e » \ / ^ 
φοβερᾶς αὐτοῦ παρουσίας ὅταν ἔλθῃ μετὰ δόξης κρῖναι 
ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς. ὅταν μέλλῃ ἀποδιδόναι ἑκάστῳ κατὰ 

A » , "^ ^ e ^ pos c Ν e ^ ^ 
τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ: φεῖσαι ἡμῶν Ἱκύριε ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν, μᾶλλον 
δὲ κατὰ τὴν εὐσπλαγχνίαν αὐτοῦ προσφέροµέν σοι Δέσποτα 

\ \ 7 \ > s s , “ 
τὴν φοβερὰν ταύτην καὶ ἀναίμακτον θυσίαν δεόμενοι ἵνα 
μὴ κατὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν ποιήσῃς μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν μηδὲ κατὰ 

^ , ^ 
τὰς ἀνομίας ἡμῶν ἀνταποδώσῃς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὴν σὴν 
ἐπιείκειαν καὶ ἄφατόν σου φιλανθρωπίαν ὑπερβὰς καὶ 

, s A » e ^ / ^ m^ € ^ 
ἐξαλείψας τὸ καθ ἡμῶν χειρόγραφον τῶν σῶν ἱκετῶν 
χαρίση ἡμῖν τὰ ἐπουράνια καὶ αἰώνιά σου δωρήµατα ἃ 
, 0 IN ^ , 16 \ 5 , » \ 1 \ δέ 
ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδε καὶ οὓς οὐκ ἤκουσε καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν 
> s > > s ^ e / © \ ^ , ^ / 
ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη. ἃ ἡτοίμασας ὁ Θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσί 

\ NÝ 203 X \ \ \ , \ € y , , Ν 
σε, καὶ μὴ δι’ ἐμὲ καὶ διὰ τὰς ἐμὰς ἁμαρτίας ἀθετήσῃς τὸν 

\ r 
λαὸν φιλάνθρωπε Kúpie 

ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐκ τρίτου 
€ ^ / Sy or / e ΄ 
Ο γὰρ λαός σου καὶ ἡ ἐκκλησία σου ἱκετεύει σε 
ὁ λαός 


Ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς Κύριε ὁ Θεὸς ὁ Πατὴρ ὁ παντοκράτωρ 


270 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


πάλιν λέγει ὁ ἱερεύς 
^ , ^ t 
Βλέησον ἡμᾶς ὁ Θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ. ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς ὁ Θεὸς 
c \ en 3307 EIER ε \ \ \ / » , 
ὁ σωτὴρ ἡμῶν. ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς ὁ Θεὸς κατὰ τὸ μέγα ἔλεός 
σου καὶ ἐξαπόστειλον ἐφ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα 
^ ^ ^ , 
δῶρα ταῦτα τὸ [Πνεῦμα σου τὸ mavayıov 
εἶτα κλίνας τὸν αὐχένα λέγει 
τὸ Κύριον καὶ ζωοποιόν, τὸ σύνθρονόν σοι τῷ Θεῷ καὶ 
^ ^ en m x 
Πατρὶ καὶ TO novoyevei cov Tia, τὸ συμβασιλεῦον, τὸ 
[] he ^ , / \ 
ὁμοούσιον τε kal συναϊΐδιον, TO λαλῆσαν ἐν νόμῳ καὶ προφη- 
^ a - , NÚ 
ταῖς καὶ τῇ καινῇ σου διαθήκη. τὸ καταβὰν ἐν εἴδει περι- 
^ Ch A \ vr e ^ > ^ r A , ^ 95 5 , 
στερᾶς ἐπὶ τὸν Κύριον ἡμῶν ᾿]ησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐν τῷ ᾿Ἱορδάνη 
^ ^ , \ \ e / 
ποταμῷ καὶ μεῖναν ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, τὸ καταβὰν ἐπὶ τοὺς ἁγίους 
» ^ ^ t€ ΄ 
σου ἀποστόλους ἐν εἴδει πυρίνων γλωσσῶν ἐν τῷ ὑπερῴῳ 
τῆς ἀγίας καὶ ἐνδόξου Σιὼν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῆς ἁγίας πεντη- 
25.0) ο πέρα ος η 
κοστῆς 
καὶ ἀνιστάμενος λέγει καθ᾿ ἑαυτόν 
, ^ \ ^ , ^ , , / 
αὐτὸ τὸ Π νεῦμά σου τὸ πανάγιον κατάπεµψον, Δέσποτα, 
ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα ἅγια δῶρα ταῦτα 
ἐκφώνησις 
ἵνα ἐπιφοιτῆσαν τῇ ἁγίᾳ καὶ ἀγαθῇ καὶ ἐνδόξῳ αὐτοῦ 
ἢ η ἁγίᾳ γαθῇ καὶ ἐνδόξῳ αὖτ 
is lá , \ PN \ \ » ^ ^ 
παρουσία ἁγιάσῃ καὶ ποιῇ τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον σῶμα 


u ^ 
ἅγιον Χριστοῦ 
ὁ λαός 


᾿Αμήν 
ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐκφωνεῖ 
καὶ τὸ ποτηριον τοῦτο αἷμα τίμιον Χριστοῦ 
ὁ λαός | 
"A nv 
εἶτα λέγει καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἱστάμενος 
ἵνα γένηται πᾶσι τοῖς ἐξ αὐτῶν μεταλαμβάνουσιν εἰς ἄφε- 
σιν ἁμαρτιῶν καὶ εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον, εἰς ἁγιασμὸν ψυχῶν 
καὶ σωμάτων, εἰς καρποφορίαν ἔργων ἀγαθῶν, κ.τ.λ. 
Pope Gelasius I. + 496 a.p. 
Epistle to Elpidius 
Sacrosancta religio, quae catholicam tenet disciplinam, 


APPENDIX 277 


tantam sibi reverentiam vindicat, ut ad eam quilibet 
nisi pura conscientia non audeat pervenire. Nam quo- 
modo ad divini mysterii consecrationem coelestis Spiritus 
invocatus adveniet, si sacerdos et qui eum adesse depre- 
catur, criminosis plenus actionibus reprobetur. 

Mansi, VIII., 139. 


Fulgentius of Ruspe. T9533 A.D. 
Ad Monimum, II., 6 


Iam nunc etiam illa nobis est de Spiritus Sancti missione 
quaestio revolvenda: cur scilicet, si omni Trinitati sac- 
rificium offertur, ad sanctificandum oblationis nostrae 
munus Saneti Spiritus tantum missio postuletur, quasi 
vero, ut ita dicam, ipse Pater Deus, a quo Spiritus Sanc- 
tus procedit, sacrificium sibi oblatum sanctificare non 
potest, aut ipse Filius sanctificare nequeat sacrificium 
eorporis sui, quod offerimus nos, cum corpus suum ipse 
sanctificaverit, quod obtulit, ut redimeret nos; aut ita 
Spiritus Sanetus ad consecrandum ecclesiae sacrificium 
mittendus sit, tanquam Pater aut Filius sacrificantibus 
desit. 

... Sie etiam in missione vel adventu Spiritus 
Sancti nullus localis illius accipiendus motus, sed nostrae 


credendus est sanctificationis effectus. 
P. L. Ixv., 184, 185. 


Ibid., IL, 7 

Cum ergo sicut diximus tota Trinitas unitate deitatis 
suae naturaliter immensa infinitate permaneat, et sic 
localiter nusquam sit, ut tamen nusquam desit, atque 
ita ubique tota, ut nec per partes creaturae totius parti- 
eulariter dividi, nee universitate totius possit creaturae 
concludi, quotiens Spiritus Sanctus ad consecrandum 
sacrificium a Patre poscitur: prima est fidei ratio prima- 
que cunctis christianis salubriter retentanda cautela, 
ut Sancti Spiritus nullatenus localis cogitetur aut existi- 
metur adventus. P. L. Ixv., 186. 


278 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Ad Monimum, IL, 10 

Quando autem congruentius quam ad consecrandum 
sacrificium corporis Christi saneta ecclesia (quae est 
corpus Christi) Spiritus Saneti deposcat adventum, quae 
ipsum caput suum secundum carnem de Spiritu Sancto 
noverit natum? Sie enim angelico Maria informatur 
eloquio: “Spiritus Sanctus superveniet in te et Virtus 
Altissimi obumbrabit tibi." P. L. lxv., 188. 


Frag. xxviii. ex Lib. viii. contra Fabianum 


Agnosce igitur, quid in offerendis. sacrificiis agitur, 
ut exinde intelligas, quare ibi adventus Sancti Spiritus 
postuletur. Nempe illud impletur in sacrificiis offerendis, 
quod ipsum Salvatorem nostrum  praecepisse beatus 
testatur Apostolus dicens: ' Quoniam Dominus Iesus, 
in qua nocte tradebatur," ete. (I Cor. xi., 23-26). Ideo 
igitur sacrificium offertur, ut mors Domini annuncietur, 
et ejus fiat commemoratio, qui pro nobis posuit animam 
suam. . . . Quoniam ergo Christus pro nobis charitate 
mortuus est, cum tempore sacrificii commemorationem 
mortis ejus facimus, charitatem nobis tribui per adven- 
tum Saneti Spiritus postulamus. . . . Sanctificat itaque 
sacrifieium ecclesiae Spiritus Sanctus, et ideo in fide et 
charitate populus permanet christianus. 

P. L. Ixv., 789, 791. 
Frag. xxix., ?bid. 

Sanctus itaque Spiritus, qui ecclesiae charitatem donat 
et servat, et sacrificium et baptisma divinae virtutis 
operatione sanctifieat. P. L. Ixv., 795. 


Caesarius of Arles. 470—542 Α.Ὀ. 
V. De Paschate 
Recedat ergo omne infidelitatis ambiguum, quando- 
quidem qui auctor est muneris, ipse etiam testis veritatis. 


Nam invisibilis sacerdos visibiles creaturas in substan- 
tiam corporis et sanguinis sui, sui verbi secreta potestate 


. APPENDIX 279 


convertit, ita dicens: Accipite et edite, hoc est corpus 
meum. Et sanctificatione repetita: Accipite et bibite, 
hic est sanguis meus. Sicut ergo et ad nutum praecipien- 
tis Domini, repente ex nihilo substiterunt excelsa coe- 
lorum, profunda fluctuum, vasta terrarum, pari potentia 
in spiritualibus sacramentis verbi praecipit virtus, et rei 
servit effectus. Quanta itaque celebranda beneficia vis 
divinae benedictionis operetur, quomodo tibi novum et 
impossibile esse non debeat quod in Christi substan- 
tiam terrena et mortalia commutantur, teipsum qui jam 
in Christo es regeneratus, interroga. P. L. Ixvii., 1053. 


Sicut autem quicunque ad fidem veniens ante verba 
baptismi adhuc in vineulo est veteris debiti, his vero 
commemoratis mox exuitur omni faeci peccati: ita quando 
benedicendae verbis coelestibus creaturae sacris altaribus 
imponuntur, antequam invocatione sancti nominis con- 
secrentur, substantia illic est panis et vini: post autem 


verba Christi corpus et sanguis Christi. 
P. L. Ixvii., 1056. 


Fragment of Gallican Liturgy 
Per Dominum nostrum, Qui pridie quam pateretur. 
Fiat nune quaesumus, indulgentissime pater, per invoca- 
tionem nominis tui atque infusionem Spiritus tui sancti 


ereaturis omnibus haec creatura. . 
HAMMOND, The Ancient Liturgy of Antioch, etc., pp. 53-54. 


Eusebius of Alexandria. c. 560 a.p. 

Πολλοὶ πρεσβύτεροι, ἁμαρτωλοὶ ὄντες. προσφέρουσι τὰ 
δῶρα. καὶ οὐκ ἀποστρέφεται αὐτοὺς ὁ Θεός, ἀλλὰ τῷ 
᾿Αγίῳ Πνεύματι ἁγιάζει καὶ μεγαλύνει. 

P. G. xevi., 300, 801. 


Eutychius of Constantinople. c. 582 a.p. 
De pasch. et de ss. euch. 7 


. + + τὰ εἰσφερόμενα καὶ μηδέπω τελειωθέντα διὰ τῆς 


280 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ἀρχιερατικῆς ἐπικλήσεως καὶ τοῦ Ev αὐτοῖς ἀναλάμποντος 
ἁγιασμοῦ. P. G. Ixxxvi., 2401. 


Anastasius Sinaita. +598 or f 610 a.p. 
Oratio de sacra synaxi 

TÍ ποιεῖς, ἄνθρωπε; ὁ ἱερεὺς τὴν ἀναίμακτον θυσίαν 
ὑπὲρ σοῦ προσφέρει τῷ Δεσπότῃ. καὶ σὺ καταφρονεῖς : ὁ 

E \ e \ ^ , / e 2 / is 
ἱερεὺς ὑπὲρ σοῦ ἀγωνίζεται' ὡς ἐν δικαστηρίῳ φοβέρῳ 
οὕτως τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ παριστάμενος. παρακαλεῖ καὶ ἐπι- 

7 » ^ , ae / , , , 
σπεύδει, ἄνωθεν τὴν χάριν τοῦ ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματός σοι ἐπι- 
φοιτῆσαι, καὶ σὺ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ σωτηρίας οὐ φροντίζεις ; 

les (Gi 15080, SS 


Pope Gregory I. +004 a.p. 
Epistle to John of Syracuse. (Ep. ix., 12 (26)) 

Orationem vero Dominicam ideirco mox post precem 
dicimus, quia mos apostolorum fuit, ut ad ipsam solum- 
modo orationem oblationis hostiam consecrarent, et 
valde mihi inconveniens visum est, ut precem, quam 
scholasticus composuerat, super oblationem diceremus 
et ipsam traditionem, quem Redemptor noster composuit, 
super ejus corpus et sanguinem non diceremus. Sed et 
apud Graecos ab omni populo dicitur, apud nos vero a 
solo sacerdote. P. L. Ixxvii., 956-957. 


Dialogues, Book IV., chap. lviii. 

Quis enim fidelium habere dubium possit, in ipsa im- 
molationis hora ad sacerdotis vocem coelos aperiri,-in illo 
Jesu Christi mysterio angelorum choros adesse, summis 
ima sociari, terrena coelestibus jungi, unumque ex visi- 
. bilibus atque invisibilibus fieri ? P. L. Ixxvii., 425, 428. 


Attributed to Gregory by Paul the Deacon 
Praescius Conditor noster infirmitatis nostrae ea potes- 
tate, qua cuncta fecit ex nihilo, et corpus sibi ex carne 
semper virginis operante Sancto Spiritu fabricavit, panem 


APPENDIX 281 


et vinum aqua mixtum, manente propria specie, in carnem 
et sanguinem suum ad catholicam precem ob reparationem 
nostram Spiritus sui sanctificatione convertit. 

Bo xy; 08. 


John Moschus. {020 Α.Ὀ. 
Pratum Spirituale, xxv. 

€ ^ Ν Já ^ 

O ἀββᾶς Γρηγόριος ὁ ἀπὸ Σχολαρίων. ἔλεγεν ἡμῖν, ὅτι 
ἦν τις ἀδελφὸς ἐν τῷ κοινοβίῳ τοῦ Χουζιβᾶ ὃς ἦν μαθὼν 
τὴν προσκομιδὴν τῆς ἁγίας ἀναφορᾶς * ἐν μιᾷ οὖν ἐπέμφθη 
ἐνέγκαι εὐλογίας καὶ ἐρχόμενος ἐν τῷ μοναστηρίῳ εἶπεν 
τὴν προσκομιδὴν ὡς ἐν τάξει τῆς στιχολογίας ' καὶ τὰς 

, \ > Vf s , P^ / 1 ^^ € / 
αὐτὰς εὐλογίας προέθηκαν ἐν τῷ δίσκῳ ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ θυσια- 

/ e , \ , ^ s \ > ^ ^ 

στηρίῳ οἱ διάκονοι * καὶ ἐν τῷ προσκοµίζειν τὸν ἀββᾶν τὸν 
, / x , ΄ wv ἌΣ / 7 s 
Ιωάννην τὸν τότε πρεσβύτερον ὄντα TO ἐπίκλην Χοζεβίτην 
ὃς καὶ ὕστερον γέγονεν Καισαρείας τῆς κατὰ Παλαιστίνην 
ἐπίσκοπος οὐκ ἐθεάσατο κατὰ τὸ ἔθος τὴν ἐπιφοίτησιν τοῦ 
© s ΄ \ 9 \ , » SUN ei 
Ἁγίου [Πνεύματος kai λυπηθεὶς NTL ἄρα αὐτὸς ἥμαρτεν 

M ^ ^ > / A ^ Ne » ^ , ^ 
καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἀπέστη τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ “Άγιον εἰσῆλθεν ἐν τῷ 
διακονικῷ κλαίων καὶ ῥίπτων ἑαυτὸν ἐπὶ πρόσωπον" kal 
φαίνεται αὐτῷ ὁ ἄγγελος Κυρίου λέγων ὅτι “᾿Εξότου ἐν τῇ 
ὁδῷ ἐπικομιζόμενος τὰς εὐλογίας ὁ ἀδελφὸς ἔλεγεν τὴν 
e / > \ € , Ν s > 499 \ 
ἁγίαν ἀναφορὰν ἡγιάσθησαν καὶ τετελειωμέναι εἰσί." Καὶ 
, ^ / , ” € / “ / ^ ^ 
ἀπὸ τότε λόγον ἔθηκεν ὁ γέρων, ὥστε μηδένα μαθεῖν τὴν 
ἁγίαν ἀναφοράν, μὴ ἔχοντα χειροτονίαν, μηδὲ ὡς ἔτυχεν 
λέγειν αὐτὴν ἐν οἱωδήποτε καιρῷ χωρὶς τόπου ἡγιασμένου. 

P. G. Ixxxvii., 2869, 2872. 


Ibid., cl. 

- . + Ἤρξατο ὁ ἐπίσκοπος τῆς ἁγίας ἀναφορᾶς, καὶ πλη- 
ρώσας τὴν εὐχὴν τῆς ἁγίας προσκομιδῆς. πρὸ τοῦ TO συμ- 
πέρασμα ἐπιθῇ εὐχῆς. ἤρξατο ἐκ δευτέρου. καὶ πάλιν ἐκ 
τρίτου καὶ τετάρτου τῆς ἁγίας ἀναφορᾶς. Ἱάντων οὖν 
ξενιζοµένων ἐπὶ τῇ βραδύτητι, λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ πάπας “Ti 
ἐστιν τοῦτο ὅτι ἰδοὺ τέταρτον τὴν ἁγίαν εὐχὴν εἶπες, καὶ οὐ 


282 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


m e , 
τελεῖς αὐτήν ; Τότε ἀπεκρίθη ὁ émíokomos* “ Zuyx@- 
\ 
ρησόν μοι, ὦ ἅγιε πάπα, ὅτι οὐκ εἶδον κατὰ τὸ σύνηθες τὴν 
“δ / ΄ , / \ N ΤᾺ, > 
τοῦ ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματος ἐπιφοίτησιν" καὶ διὰ τοῦτο οὐκ 
ἐτέλεσα. P. G. Ixxxvii., 3016. 


Isidore of Seville. 7 688 a.p. 
De Ecclesiasticis Officiis, Bk. L, ch. 15. 


Ordo autem missae et orationum, quibus oblata Deo 
sacrificia consecrantur, primum a sancto Petro est insti- 
tutus, eujus celebrationem uno eodemque modo universus 
peragit orbis. 

Prima earundem oratio admonitionis est erga populum, 
ut excitentur ad exorandum Deum. 

Secunda invocationis ad Deum est, ut clementer sus- 
cipiat preces fidelium oblationesque eorum. 

Tertia autem effunditur pro offerentibus sive pro de- 
funetis fidelibus ut per idem sacrificium veniam conse- 
quantur. 

Quarta post haec infertur pro osculo pacis, ut charitate 
reconciliati omnes invicem digne sacramento corporis et 
sanguinis Christi consocientur, quia non recipit dissensio- 
nem eujusquam Christi indivisibile corpus. 

Quinta deinde infertur illatio in sanctificatione obla- 
tionis, in qua etiam et ad Dei laudem terrestrium crea- 
turarum virtutumque coelestium universitas provocatur 
et Hosanna in excelsis cantatur, quod Salvatore de genere 
David nascente salus mundo usque ad excelsa pervenerit. 

Porro sexta exhine succedit conformatio sacramenti, 
ut oblatio, quae Deo offertur, sanctificata per Spiritum 
Sanetum, Christi corpori ac sanguini conformetur. 

Harum ultima est oratio, qua Dominus noster dis- 
eipulos suos orare instituit dicens: Pater noster, qui es 
in coelis. . . . Hae sunt autem septem sacrificii orationes 
commendatae evangeliea apostolieaque doctrina, cujus 
numeri ratio instituta videtur vel propter septenariam 
sanctae ecclesiae universitatem, vel propter septiformem 


APPENDIX 283 


gratiae Spiritum, eujus dono ea quae inferuntur sancti- 
ficantur. P. L. Ixxxiii., 752, 753. 
De Ecclesiasticis Officiis, Bk. I., ch. xviii. 

Haec autem [panis et vinum] dum sunt visibilia, sanc- 
tificata tamen per Spiritum Sanctum, in sacramentum 
divini eorporis transeunt. P. L. Ixxxiii., 755. 

Etym. (Originum) VI., 19 

Sacrificium dietum quasi sacrum factum, quia prece 
mystiea consecratur in memoriam pro nobis Dominicae 
passionis, unde hoc eo jubente corpus Christi et sanguinem 
dicimus, quod, dum sit ex fructibus terrae, sanctificatur 
et fit sacramentum, operante invisibiliter Spiritu Dei. 

123, ΤΊ ΣΧΣΙ 250 
Epistle VII. to Redemptus, 2 


Scias itaque eorum jam dietis consuetudinibus minime 
nos opponere reprehensionis obstaculum, guandiu eas 
Romana Ecelesia dixerit tolerandas, maxime cum non 
sint de essentia, sive substantia sacramenti. De sub- 
stantia sacramenti sunt verba Dei a sacerdote in sacro 
prolata ministerio, scililet, Hoc est corpus meum, panisque 
frumenti et vinum, cui consuevit aqua adhiberi, quia 
utrumque de latere Christi, videlicet, sanguis et aqua 
profluxit. P. L. Ixxxiii., 905-906. 


John Damascene. c. 685-765 a.p. 
De Fide Orth., IV., 13 

Ei Towvv ὁ λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ ζῶν ἐστι καὶ ἐνεργής. καὶ 

, eu " / ς [A , js , 5 g 
πάντα ὅσα ἠθέλησεν ὁ Κύριος ἐποίησεν " εἰ εἶπε, γενηθήτω 
φῶς καὶ ἐγένετο" γενηθήτω στερέωμα καὶ ἐγένετο" εἰ τῷ 

/ / € , M , , \ ^ ΄ 
λόγῳ Κυρίου οἱ οὐρανοὶ ἐστερεώθησαν καὶ τῷ πνεύματι 
τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ πᾶσα ἡ δύναμις αὐτῶν * εἰ ὁ οὐρανὸς 
καὶ ἡ γῆ. ὕδωρ τε καὶ πῦρ καὶ ἀὴρ καὶ πᾶς ὁ κόσμος αὐτῶν 
τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ Κυρίου συνετελέσθησαν καὶ τοῦτο δὴ τὸ 

^ € 

πολυθρύλλητον ζῶον, ὁ ἄνθρωπος - εἰ θελήσας αὐτὸς ὁ 
Λόγος ἐγένετο ἄνθρωπος καὶ τὰ τῆς ἁγίας ἀεὶ παρθένου 


284 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


\ “ ^ 
καθαρὰ xai ἀμώμητα αἵματα ἑαυτῷ ἀσπόρως σάρκα ὑπεσ- 
, \ ^ ^ ^ 
τήσατο, οὐ δύναται τὸν ἄρτον ἑαυτοῦ σῶμα ποιῆσαι : καὶ 
m © 9 ^ 
τὸν οἶνον καὶ ὕδωρ, αἷμα : εἶπεν ἐν ἀρχῇ. “ἐξαγαγέτω ἡ 
^ , / “45 A ^ m ^ ^ 
γῆ βοτάνην χόρτου." καὶ µέχρι τοῦ νὺν TOU ὑετοῦ γενο- 
/ , , \ 18 A ον θ / , 
μένου ἐξάγει τὰ ἴδια βλαστήματα, τῷ θείῳ συνελαυνομένη 
5 ^ 
καὶ δυναμουµένη προστάγματι" εἶπεν ὁ Θεός, “ τοῦτό µου 
ἐστὶ τὸ σῶμα. καὶ “ τοῦτό µου ἐστὶ τὸ αἷμα." και “τοῦτο 
^ , \ BEN , , 99 M > , 
ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν," καὶ τῷ παντοδυνάµῳ 
^ , 
αὐτοῦ προστάγματι, ἕως ἂν ἔλθῃ. γίνεται ' οὕτω γὰρ εἶπεν. 
* €ws ἂν ἔλθῃ." Καὶ γίνεται ὑετὸς τῇ καινῇ ταύ 1 
η. γ ὑετὸς τῇ καινῇ ταύτῃ γεωργίᾳ 
\ ^ , , € PIE / , , , 
διὰ τῆς ἐπικλήσεως. ἡ τοῦ Ayiov Πνεύματος ἐπισκιάζουσα 
δύναμις. “Ὥσπερ γὰρ πάντα ὅσα ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεός. τῇ τοῦ 
Αγίου Πνεύματος ἐνεργείᾳ ἐποίησεν. ov ὶ νῦν ἡ τοῦ 
γ ματος ἐνεργείᾳ ἐποίησεν. οὕτω καὶ νῦν ἡ τοῦ 
, s 
Πνεύματος ἐνεργεία τὰ ὑπὲρ φύσιν ἐργάζεται. ἃ οὐ δύναται 
^ , ^ ^ 35 
χωρῆσαι. εἰ μὴ μόνη ἡ mioris‘ “ πῶς ἔσται μοι τοῦτο. 
\ eei T θέ το \ »” ὃ > , 29. » 
φησὶν ἡ ἁγία παρθένος. “ ἐπεὶ ἄνδρα οὐ γινώσκω + ἀποκ- 
, ^ , 
piverat Γαβριὴλ ὁ ἀρχάγγελος. ““ Πνεῦμα "Αγιον ἐπελεύ- 
> \ / \ , € / , , 99 \ 
σεται ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ δύναμις Ὑψίστου ἐπισκιάσει σοι" καὶ 
^ "^ ^ € » “Ὁ ^ 
νῦν ἐρωτᾷς, πῶς ὁ ἄρτος γίνεται σῶμα Χριστοῦ kai ὁ οἶνος 
καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ, αἷμα Χριστοῦ; λέγω σοι Kayo: Πνεῦμα 
p, αἷμα Χριστοῦ: λέγ dy u 
ev > ^ ^ A 
Άγιον ἐπιφοιτᾷ καὶ ταῦτα ποιεῖ τὰ ὑπὲρ λόγον καὶ ἔννοιαν. 
> ^ ΤΕΣ » θῶ € / θ , A m e / 
.. + Σῶμα ἐστιν ἀληθῶς ἡνωμένον θεότητι, τὸ ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας 
/ ^ > e 3 \ ^ » \ ^ , 
παρθένου σῶμα: οὐχ ὅτι αὐτὸ τὸ ἀναληφθὲν σῶμα ἐξ 
οὐρανοῦ κατέρχεται, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ὁ ἄρτος καὶ ὁ οἶνος µετα- 
^ , ^ - x \ 
ποιοῦνται εἰς σῶμα καὶ αἷμα Θεοῦ: εἰ δὲ τὸν τρόπον 
ἐπιζητεῖς, πῶς γίνεται, ἀρκεῖ σοι ἀκοῦσαι. ὅτι διὰ Πνεύ- 
© / er NI , ^ € / / ^ 
ματος "Αγίου, ὥσπερ καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας θεοτόκου διὰ 
Πνεύματος Αγίου ἑαυτῷ καὶ ἐν ἑαυτῷ ὁ Κύριος σάρκα 
€ , \ s , \ , > > e E 
ὑπεστήσατο: καὶ πλέον οὐδὲν γινώσκομεν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ὁ 
λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀληθής ἐστι, καὶ ἐνεργής, καὶ παντοδύ- 
va LOS, ὁ δὲ τρόπος ἀνεξερεύνητος. Οὐ χεῖρον δὲ καὶ τοῦτο 
A ^ > ε 
εἰπεῖν, ὥσπερ φυσικῶς διὰ τῆς βρώσεως ὁ ἄρτος καὶ ὁ 
οἶνος καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ διὰ τῆς πόσεως εἰς σῶμα καὶ αἷμα τοῦ 
3 / \ / , \ 3 s 
ἐσθίοντος kal πίνοντος μεταβάλλονται, kal οὐ γίνονται 
> ^ ^ ἘΝ ers 
ἕτερον σῶμα παρὰ τὸ πρότερον αὐτοῦ σῶμα" οὕτως ὁ τῆς 


APPENDIX 285 


θέ » A \ UO ὃ A ^ , X , 
προθέσεως ἄρτος, oivós τε καὶ ὕδωρ διὰ τῆς ἐπικλήσεως 
N > , ^ € / , id ^ 
καὶ ἐπιφοιτήσεως τοῦ ᾽Αγίου Πνεύματος ὑπερφυῶς µετα- 
^ ^ ^ "m ^ 
ποιοῦνται εἰς τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ τὸ αἷμα, καὶ οὐκ 
εἰσὶ δύο. ἀλλ᾽ ἓν καὶ τὸ αὐτό. 
P. G. xciv., 1140, 1141, 1144, 1145. 


Hom. in Sab. Sancto, 35 

\ ^» ^ ^ , , , 0 ^ , 
Kai τοῦ ἀμνοῦ τοῦ πάσχα µετάσχωμµεν. ἐμφορηθῶμέν TE 
τοῦ καινοῦ τῆς ἀμπέλου γεννήματος, νῦν μὲν σάρκα Θεοῦ 
, s ^ © PUTEM » > ^ A^. 9 , M 
ἐκ σίτου καὶ αἷμα Θεοῦ ἐξ οἴνου, ἀληθῶς τῇ ἐπικλήσει καὶ 
ἀρρήτως μεταποιούμενον * ἀψευδὴς γὰρ ὁ ἐπαγγειλάμενος. 

P. G. xevi., 637, 640. 


Peter Mansour 
De corp. et sang. Christi, 4 
Πῶς οὖν γέγονεν; . . . Φησὶν ὁ ἱερεύς. ὡς ὁ ἄγγελος, 
‘ e 9 ^ ^ Ne e , ^ ΓΑ 
‘iva ἐπιφοιτῆσαν Ilveüua τὸ "Αγιον ἁγιάσῃ καὶ ποιήσῃ. 
τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον σῶμα ἅγιον Χριστοῦ, καὶ τὸ ποτή- 
ριον τοῦτο αἷμα τίμιον Χριστοῦ." P. G. xev., 409. 


Epist. ad Zech. 
^ ^ 5 t ^ 
Πνεῦμα " A*ytov ἐπιφοιτᾶ, ὡς εἶπεν ὁ ἄγγελος τῇ παρθένῳ 
ἐρωτησάση " “las ἔσται μοι τοῦτο, ἐπεὶ ἄνδρα οὐ γινώ- 
? 6 ^ e , / SEEN , 55 e ΝΤ 
CKO : Πνεῦμα "A yrov ἐπελεύσεται ἐπὶ σέ" οὕτω καὶ ἐν 
τῇ τραπέζῃ Πνεῦμα "Άγιον ἐπιφοιτᾶ. καὶ γίνεται σῶμα 
η TP 7 μ ty z ty, μ 
Χριστοῦ. P. 6. xev., 404. 


Council of Constantinople. 754 A.n. 

e 5 \ N ΄ ^ ^ ^ e t 

Ὥσπερ οὖν τὸ κατὰ φύσιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ σῶμα ἅγιον, ὡς 
θ θέ * ο δῆ \ \ / » ς N , m8 / 
εωθέν * οὕτως δῆλον καὶ τὸ θέσει ἤτοι ἡ εἰκὼν αὐτοῦ Ayla, 
ὡς διά τινος ἁγιασμοῦ χάριτι θεουµένη. Τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ 
ἐπραγματεύσατο. ὡς ἔφημεν, ὁ Δεσπότης Χριστός, ὅπως 

θ \ , ^ H / ^ , / \ cA 
καθάπερ τὴν σάρκα. ἣν ἀνέλαβε, τῷ οἰκείω κατὰ φύσιν 
ἁγιασμῶ ἐξ αὐτῆς ἑνώσεως ἐθέωσεν. ὁμοίως καὶ τὸν τῆς 
εὐχαριστίας ἄρτον, ὡς ἀψευδῆ εἰκόνα τῆς φυσικῆς σαρκός. 
ὃ \ ne / ΄ , / [4 / ^ 
ta τοῦ ' Ayíov Πνεύματος ἐπιφοιτήσεως ἁγιαζόμενον, θεῖον 


286 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


σῶμα εὐδόκησε γίνεσθαι, µεσιτεύοντος τοῦ ἐν µετενέξει ἐκ 
τοῦ κοινοῦ πρὸς τὸ ἅγιον τὴν ἀναφορὰν ποιουμένου ἱερέως. 
Mansi, XIII., 264 (in Act. vi. of II. Nicza, 787 A.D.). 
Second Council of Nicea, 787 A.p. Acr. VI. 

Οὐκ odv σαφῶς ἀποδέδεικται, ὅτι οὐδαμοῦ οὔτε ὁ Κύριος. 
οὔτε οἱ ἀπόστολοι, ἢ πατέρες εἰκόνα εἶπον τὴν διὰ τοῦ 
c 7 , » s / > \ 3 Ν ^ 
ἱερέως προσφερομένην ἀναίμακτον θυσίαν, ἀλλὰ αὐτὸ σῶμα 
καὶ αὐτὸ αἷμα. Kai πρὸ μὲν τῆς ἁγιασμοῦ τελειώσεως 
ἀντίτυπά τισι τῶν ἁγίων πατέρων εὐσεβῶς ἔδοξεν ὀνομά- 
ζεσθαι: ὧν ἐστιν ὐστάθιος ὁ εὐσταθὴς πρόμαχος τῆς 
> , / \ ^ 3 s / 
ὀρθοδόξου πιστέως. καὶ τῆς ᾿Αρειάνης κακοδαιμονίας kara- 
UTS, καὶ Βασίλειος τῆς αὐτῆς δεισιδαιμονίας καθαιρέτης, 
ὁ τὴν ὑφ᾽ ἥλιον τὴν λεῖαν βάσιν τῶν ὀρθῶς ἐκδιδάξας Soy- 
μάτων. ᾿Εξ ἑνὸς γὰρ καὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ πνεύματος φθεγγομένοι. 
ὁ μὲν ἑρμηνεύων τὸ ἐν ταῖς παροιμίαις ῬΣολομώντειον ῥητόν " 
" φάγετε τὸν ἐμὸν ἄρτον. καὶ πίετε οἶνον ὃν κεκέρακα ὑμῖν." 

(ὃ / Ξ- ςς ὃ \ ^ » \ ^ » \ > / nm 
τάδε φησί ιὰ τοῦ οἴνου καὶ τοῦ ἄρτου τὰ ἀντίτυπα τῶν 


, 


^ ^ x ^ y. ^ s ε N ^ 
σωματικῶν τοῦ Χριστοῦ κηρύττει μελῶν. Ο δὲ ἐκ τῆς 
αὐτῆς πηγῆς ἀπαντλήσας. ὡς ἴσασι πάντες οἱ τῆς ἱερωσύ- 
UNS μυστηπόλοι. ἐν τῇ εὐχὴ τῆς θείας ἀναφορᾶς ὧδέ πως 
= τς CC Ὧ nie tu Z 5 
λέγει" “ ÜappoDvres προσεγγίζοµεν τῷ ἁγίῳ θυσιαστηρίῳ. 
καὶ προθέντες τὰ ἀντίτυπα τοῦ ἁγίου σώματος καὶ αἵματος 
τοῦ Χριστοῦ σοῦ, σοῦ δεόμεθα, καί σε παρακαλοῦμεν." 
N X € ^ > , > / ^ » ^ 
καὶ TO ἑξῆς ἐπιφερόμενον ἐκδηλοτέραν τὴν ἔννοιαν τοῦ 
πατρὸς καταρτίζει, ὡς πρὸ τοῦ ἁγιασθῆναι ἐκλήθη ἀντί 
τυπα. μετὰ δὲ τὸν ἁγιασμὸν σῶμα κυρίως καὶ αἷμα Χρι- 
στοῦ λέγονται. καί εἰσι. καὶ πιστεύονται. 
Mansi, XIIL, 265. 
Nicephorus of Constantinople. + 328 A.p. 
Antirr. II. adv. Const. Copron. 

Οὕτω δὴ καὶ ταῦτα ὑπερφυῶς ἐπικλήσει ToU ἱερεύοντος. 
ἐπιφοιτήσει τε τοῦ Αγίου Πνεύματος. εἰς σῶμα καὶ αἷμα 
^ ^ , ^ \ \ ς £L τς / 
τοῦ Ἀριστοῦ μεταβάλλεται ' τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ ἡ τοῦ ἱερέως 

αἴτησις ἔχει. P. G. c., 336. 


APPENDIX 287 


Antirr. contra Eus. 45 
"A / \ id ^ Lo, , ^ , N 
περ τοίνυν καὶ ἡμεῖς νῦν προσφέρομεν κατὰ σύμβολον, 
x 3 
τὸν ἄρτον φημὶ καὶ τὸν οἶνον, πιστεύομεν ἀκλινέστατα, 
καὶ ὁμολογοῦμεν, ὅτι ἐπικλήσει ἱερατικῃ, ἐπιφοιτήσει τε 
τῇ τοῦ Παναγίου Πνεύματος, μυστικῶς καὶ ἀοράτως σῶμα 
Χριστοῦ καὶ αἷμα ἀληθῶς ἀποτελούμενα. 
Pitra, Spicileg., tom. i., p. 440. 


James of Edessa. 640-708 a.n. 


Deinde dispensationem Domini commemorat et lar- 
gitionem mysteriorum, et signat super oblationem tres 
cruces et tres super calicem, et quasi ex ore Domini dicit: 
Estote facientes memoriam meam, et respondent: me- 
mores sumus. Deinde orat super populum: deinde 
supplex orat, ut adveniat Spiritus Sanctus et perficiat 


eucharistiam; deinde commemorat illos, quos oportet. 
(Angelo Mai, Script. vet. nov. collect. t. X., pars 2, p. 26.) 
Horrz, Die Epiklesis, etc., pp. 28-29, note 55. 


Bede. +735 A.D. 
Homilies, Bk I., xiv. 

Lavat itaque nos ἃ peccatis nostris quotidie in sanguine 
suo, cum ejusdem beatae passionis ad altare memoria 
replicatur, cum panis et vini creatura in sacramentum 
carnis et sanguinis ejus ineffabili Spiritus sanctificatione 
transfertur. P. L. xciv., 75. 


The Liturgy of S. Chrysostom. Ninth Century 
ὁ ἱερεὺς μυστικῶς 

Μετὰ τούτων καὶ ἡμεῖς τῶν δυνάμεων δέσποτα Φφιλάν- 
EN M / er 5 \ , ^ e 
Opere βοῶμεν καὶ λέγομεν Atos εἶ καὶ mavayıos kal ὁ 
, σελ M ^ ^ , Nef e = 
novorevýs σου Tios καὶ τὸ [Πνεῦμά σου τὸ Αγιον" ἅγιος εἶ 
καὶ πανάγιος καὶ μεγαλοπρεπὴς ἡ δόξα σου ὃς τὸν κόσμον 
σου οὕτως ἠγάπησας ὥστε τὸν Tiov σου τὸν μονογενῆ δοῦ- 

eu ^ € , , , ^ \ > , > δ» 
ναι Wa πᾶς 0 πιστεύων εἰς αὐτον μὴ ἀπόληται αλλ ἔχῃ 
ζωὴν αἰώνιον * ὃς ἐλθὼν καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν οἰκονο- 


288 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


/ g. ^ NOE did e ^ \ » 
μίαν πληρώσας. τῇ νυκτὶ 7 παρεδίδου ἑαυτὸν λαβὼν ἄρτον 
ἐν ταῖς ἁγίαις αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀχράντοις καὶ ἀμωμήτοις χερσὶν 
εὐχαριστήσας καὶ εὐλογήσας ἔκλασεν καὶ ἔδωκεν τοῖς 
ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ μαθηταῖς καὶ ἀποστόλοις εἰπών 

ἐκφω. 
, , A^ 23273 \ ^ ^ , ^ © \ € ^ 

Λάβετε φάγετε" τοῦτ᾽ ἐστὶν τὸ σῶμά µου τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν 
[κλώμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν]. 

c f. N ^ , \ \ ^ , 

Ομοίως καὶ τὸ ποτήριον μετὰ τὸ δειπνῆσαι λέγων 

ἐκφω. 

Πίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες ' τοῦτ᾽ ἐστὶν τὸ αἷμά µου τὸ τῆς 
καινῆς διαθήκης τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ πολλῶν ἐκχυνόμενον εἰς 
ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν 

ὁ λαός 
᾿Αμήν. 
ὁ ἱερεὺς μυστικῶς 

Μεμνημένοι τοίνυν τῆς σωτηρίου ταύτης ἐντολῆς καὶ πάν- 
των τῶν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν γεγενημένων, τοῦ σταυροῦ, τοῦ τάφου, 
τῆς τριημέρου ἀναστάσεως, τῆς εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀναβάσεως. 
τῆς ἐκ δεξιῶν καθέδρας, τῆς δευτέρας καὶ ἐνδόξου πάλιν 


παρουσίας 
ἐκφω. 


\ \ > ^ ^ \ / N , M \ 
Ta σὰ ἐκ TOV σῶν σοὶ προσφέροντες κατὰ πάντα καὶ διὰ 


πάντα 
ὁ λαός 


Σὲ ὑμνοῦμεν σὲ εὐλογοῦμεν σοὶ εὐχαριστοῦμεν Κύριε καὶ 
e ^ 
δεόµεθά σου ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν 
ὁ ἱερεὺς μυστικῶς λέγει 
"Er. προσφέροµέν σοι τὴν λογικὴν ταύτην καὶ ἀναίμακ- 
τον λατρείαν καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν καὶ δεόμεθα καὶ ἱκτεύομεν 
, N ^ , Ne μα SE ^ αν πουν ^ 
κατάπεμψον τὸ Ilvevua σου τὸ Αγιον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ 
προκείµενα δῶρα ταῦτα 
καὶ ἀνιστάμενος σφραγίζει λέγων μυστικῶς 
καὶ ποίησον τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ Ἆρισ- 
^ \ ^ / / "- € / > / 
τοῦ σου μεταβαλὼν τῷ Ilvevuari σου τῷ Απίῳ. ἀμήν 


APPENDIX 289 


\ , ^ ^ ^ 
τὸ δὲ ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ τούτῳ τίμιον αἷμα ToU Χριστοῦ σου 
^ ^ , , ^ € , , fd 
μεταβαλὼν τῷ Ilvevuari σου τῷ ᾽Αγίῳ. ἀμήν 
ὁ ἱερεὺς μυστικῶς 


ὥστε γενέσθαι τοῖς μεταλαμβάνουσιν εἰς νῆψιν ψυχῆς, εἰς 
ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν, εἰς κοινωνίαν τοῦ ᾽Αγίου σου Πνεύματος. 
εἰς βασιλείας πλήρωμα, εἰς παρρησίαν τὴν πρὸς σέ, μὴ εἰς 
κρίμα ἢ εἰς κατάκριμα. 

BRIGHTMAN, Lit. E. and W., i., 324 b seg. 


The Liturgy of S. Basil. Ninth Century 

Κατέλιπεν δὲ ἡμῖν ὑπομνήματα τοῦ σωτηρίου αὑτοῦ 
πάθους ταῦτα ἃ προτεθείκαµεν κατὰ τὰς αὐτοῦ ἐντολάς : 
µέλλων γάρ ἐξιέναι ἐπὶ τὸν ἑκούσιον καὶ ἀοίδιμον καὶ 
ζωοποιὸν αὑτοῦ θάνατον ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ yj παρεδίδου ἑαυτὸν 
ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ζωῆς λαβὼν ἄρτον ἐπὶ τῶν ἁγίων 
αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀχράντων χειρῶν καὶ ἀναδείξας σοὶ τῷ Θεῷ καὶ 
Πατρί, εὐχαριστήσας εὐλογήσας ἁγιάσας κλάσας ἔδωκεν 
τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ μαθηταῖς καὶ ἀποστόλοις εἰπών 

Λάβετε φάγετε: τοῦτό μου ἐστὶν τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν 
κλώμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν 

Ὁμοίως καὶ τὸ ποτήριον ἐκ τοῦ γεννήματος τῆς ἄμπελου 
λαβὼν κεράσας εὐχαριστήσας εὐλογήσας ἁγιάσας ἔδωκεν 
τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ μαθηταῖς καὶ ἀποστόλοις εἰπών 

Iliere ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες" τοῦτο µου ἐστὶν τὸ αἷμα τὸ 
ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ πολλῶν ἐκχυνόμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν * 
τοῦτο ποιεῖτε EIS τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν"' ὁσάκις γὰρ àv 
ἐσθίητε τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον καὶ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο πίνητε τὸν 
ἐμὸν θάνατον καταγγέλλετε, τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάστασιν ὁμολο- 
γεῖτε. 

Μεμνημένοι οὖν δέσποτα καὶ ἡμεῖς τῶν σωτηρίων αὐτοῦ 
παθημάτων, τοῦ ζωοποιοῦ σταυροῦ, τῆς τριημέρου ταφῆς. 
τῆς ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστάσεως, τῆς εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀνόδου, τῆς ἐκ 
δεξιῶν σοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Πατρὸς καθέδρας καὶ τῆς ἐνδόξου 
' kai φοβερᾶς δευτέρας αὐτοῦ παρουσίας 


290 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ἐκφω. 


N AJ , ^ ^ ^ / \ ῃ \ A 
τὰ σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν σοὶ προσφέροντες κατὰ πάντα καὶ διὰ 


πάντα 
ὁ λαός 


Σὲ ὑμνοῦμεν [σὲ εὐλογοῦμεν σοὶ εὐχαριστοῦμεν Κύριε καὶ 
δεόµεθά σου ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν] 

Διὰ τοῦτο δέσποτα πανάγιε καὶ ἡμεῖς οἱ ἁμαρτωλοὶ καὶ 
> / ^ 7 ς / ^ ^ e / 
ἀνάξιοι δοῦλοί σου οἱ καταξιωθέντες λειτουργεῖν τῷ ἁγίῳ 
σου θυσιαστηρίῳ, οὐ διὰ τὰς δικαιοσύνας ἡμῶν - οὐ γὰρ 
ἐποιήσαμέν τι ἀγαθὸν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς" ἀλλὰ διὰ τὰ ἐλέη σου 
καὶ τοὺς οἰκτιρμούς σου οὗς ἐξέχεας πλουσίως ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς 
θαρροῦντες προσεγγίζομεν τῷ ἁγίῳ σου θυσιαστηρίῳ καὶ 
προθέντες τὰ ἀντίτυπα τοῦ ἁγίου σώματος καὶ αἵματος τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ σου σοῦ δεόμεθα καὶ σὲ παρακαλοῦμεν ἅγιε ἁγίων 

3 s ^ ^ , , > ^ N ^ , \ 
εὐδοκίᾳ τῆς σῆς ἀγαθότητος ἐλθεῖν τὸ Ilvevua σου τὸ 
Ilavayıov ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα καὶ 
εὐλογῆσαι αὐτὰ καὶ ἁγιάσαι καὶ ἀναδεῖξαι 

καὶ σφραγίζει τὰ ἅγια δῶρα γ΄ λέγων 

N S » m^ , ^ Ν / ^ "^ # Ν 
τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ 
Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν 19000 Χριστοῦ. ἀμήν 

Ν ^ Ν \ , © ^ 
τὸ δὲ ποτήριον τοῦτο αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ 

^ ^ ^ > ^ ^ ^ 
Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. ἀμήν. τὸ ἐκχυ- 
^ ^ , ^ , 
θὲν ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ζωῆς. ἀμήν 
εὐχή 
e ^ \ / \ , αν O » \ ^ / 
ἡμᾶς δὲ πάντας τοὺς ἐκ τοῦ ἑνὸς ἄρτου καὶ τοῦ ποτηρίου 
/ e ^ > / > DEIN , € , 
μετέχοντας ἑνῶσαι ἀλλήλοις εἰς ἑνὸς Πνεύματος Αγίου 
^ , / ^ 
κοινωνίαν καὶ μηδένα ἡμῶν εἰς κρίμα ἢ εἰς κατάκριμα 
ποιῆσαι μετασχεῖν τοῦ ἁγίου σώματος. καὶ αἵματος τοῦ 

2 m^ , , eu e » \ / \ 

Χριστοῦ σου ἀλλ. ἵνα εὕρωμεν ἔλεον καὶ χάριν μετὰ 
^ ^ In 
πάντων τῶν ἁγίων τῶν AT αἰῶνός σοι εὐαρεστησάντων 
^ s ^ ^ 

τῶν προπατόρων πατέρων πατριαρχῶν προφητῶν ἀπο- 
^ , c ^ 

στόλων κηρύκων εὐαγγελιστῶν μαρτύρων ὁμολογητῶν 

/ s 
διδασκάλων καὶ παντὸς πνεύματος δικαίου ἐν πίστει 
τετελειωμένων. " BRIGHTMAN, Lit. E. and W., i., 327 a seq. 


APPENDIX 291 


Chosroes (Andzevensis) Magnus. c. 972 A.n. 


Explica:io precum missae 


Et hie ait: Accepit panem: et benedixit. Et “bene- 
dieere" est: Spiritum Sanctum introducere. Qui ad 
Mariam missus ineffabilem in ea perfecit incarnationem 
et cum Verbo divino univit carnem, quae ex virgine fuit, 


is pariter panis cum Filio Dei uniti faciet miraculum. 
P. 29 (cf. BRIGHTMAN, Lit. E. and W., p. 437, line 1). 


Tune dicit sacerdos: 

“ Adoramus et precamur et rogamus te, Domine, mitte 
super nos et oblata haec dona coaeternum tuum et 
consubstantialem Sanctum Spiritum," 

"Adoramus et precamur et rogamus te, Domine." 
Quare dicit: “te?” Hoe sibi vult: rogamus adorantes 
et precamur te, qui creator es et Pater, qui ab aeterno 
benignus et beneficus et misericors erga genus humanum 
fuisti, qui non solum creaturas ad necessitates nostras 
stabilisti, sed etiam unicum tuum et dileetum Filium 
dedisti nobis ut redemtorem et viearium. Et hune 
eundem in altari ponis ipsoque nos cibas. Quare in- 
finitae beneficentiae tuae confidentes, ut Spiritum Sanc- 
tum super nos ae super sacrificium mittas, precamur, ut 
nos quoque Spiritus Sanctus sanctificet. 

"qui pani isti benedicat et vere eum faciat corpus 
Domini nostri et redemtoris Jesus Christi; et calici 
isti benedicat et vere eum faciat sanguinem Domini 
nostri et redemtoris Jesu Christi," 

Incarnatus enim est redemtor ex Maria virgine, Spiritus 
Sanctus a Patre missus sumsit carnem ex utero Mariae 
et miscuit univitque cum Verbo divino, quod ab ipsa 
genitum ut Filius simul ac Deus manifestatum est. Idem 
in ecclesia et in sancto altari facit Spiritus Sanetus. Sum- 
tum panem cum Filio Dei unit, item et calicem, ae fit 
corpus et sanguis Christi veraciter. — Idem hoc videmus 
credimusque fieri, quia infallibile est verbum Christi, qui, 


292 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


guod ipse primus fecit, id usgue ad adventum suum in 
sui memoriam fieri iussit. — Dicentes autem Spiritum 
Sanctum coaeternum et consubstantialem, profitemur 
semper apud Patrem et cum Patre ipsum fuisse. — Sicut 
Pater erat et est et semper est, neque ullum tempus, 
quo non fuerit, exstitit, ita Spiritus Sanctus semper 
cum Patre et cum Filio et erat et est aeternus atque 
consubstantialis. Qui etiam egregium tale miraculum 
fecit: merum panem et vinum in incorruptibilitatem 
corporis ac sanguinis Del transmutans. 

“ut sit accedentibus liberation! à condemnatione, 

explationi, peccatorum remissioni." 

In fide, ut Spiritus Sanctus super sanctum sacrificium 
descendat, precati secundum dominicum verbum profite- 
mur vivificans corpus ac sanguinem, et mente haud dubi- 
tante incipimus orare. Mente scimus non dubitantes 
neque haesitantes super sacrum altare esse Filium Dei 
mortem suam, quae pro nobis evenit, perficientem testibus 
nobis. Ab hoc enim tempore idem, quod in cruce et in 


sepulero fuit, corpus est. 
Pp. 35-37 (cf. BRIGHTMAN, Lit. E. and W., p. 439, lines 1-5, 10-14, 20). 


Samonas of Gaza. fl. c. 1056 Α.Ὀ. 


Dia. cum Achmed Sar. 
Tie \ SA \ ER, , ες \ \ » 
ίθησι γὰρ ἐπὶ τὴν ἁγίαν τράπεζαν ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸν ἄρτον. 
, , \ 
ὁμοίως καὶ τὸν οἶνον, καὶ, δεομένου ἐπικλήσει ἁγίᾳ, τὸ 
Πνεῦμα τὸ Άγιον κάτεισι καὶ ἐπιφοιτᾶ τοῖς προκειµένοις. 
p ey ς 
καὶ τῷ πυρὶ τῆς αὐτοῦ θεότητος εἰς σῶμα καὶ αἷμα Χριστοῦ 
, [1 
τὸν ἄρτον kai τὸν οἶνον μεταβάλλει. . . Δέεται τοίνυν ὁ 
e \ ^ ^ \ , e , ^ \ > , 
ἱερεὺς τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Πατρός. ὡς µέσον Θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων 
e , , eu \ , , m^ ^ 
ἱστάμενος πρέσβυς. iva μὴ κώλυμα γένηται τῆς τοῦ ITava- 
, , , \ 4 M 5 
γίου Πνεύματος ἐπελεύσεως., ἀλλὰ καταπέµμψη καὶ αὖθις 
^ ^ \ \ ¢ Ν 
τὸ πανταχοῦ παρὸν θεῖον καὶ τελεταρχικὸν καὶ ἁγιαστικὸν 
^ © 3 ^ , 3 Ν ^ 
Πνεῦμα, δι οὗ τὰ πάντα τά τε ἐν οὐρανῷ. τά TE ἐπὶ γῆς 
, ^ Ὁ ^ e ^ > ^ / 
λεγόμενα ἅγια, TH μετοχῇ τῆς ἁγιαστικῆς αὐτοῦ χάριτος 


APPENDIX 293 


ἁγιάζεται. εἰς TO τελεσιουργῆσαι τὸν προκείμενον eis 
θυσίαν ἄρτον καὶ ποτήριον, καὶ ποιῆσαι αὐτά, αὐτὸ 
ἐκεῖνο τὸ Κυριακὸν σῶμα καὶ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ. 

P. G. cxx., 824, 825. 


Theophylact. + 1107 a.p. 
In Matt. xxvi. 26 
“ 4b ^ » Ν ^ / 39 ὃ / e HELEN \ ^ 
οῦτο ἔστιν TO σῶμά LOV“ δεικνύει ὅτι αὐτὸ τὸ σῶμα 
m g / , \ c » c e , , ^ 
τοῦ Κυρίου ἐστὶν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ἁγιαζόμενος ἐν τῷ θυσια- 
/ \ , NÁ aj / O > \ 3 ςς ^ » 
στηρίῳ, καὶ οὐχὶ ἀντίτυπον. v γὰρ εἶπε, ““ Τοῦτο ἔστιν 
> / „ » / eT ^ » \ ry Ee ως ας / 
ἀντίτυπον, ἀλλά, ““ Τοῦτο ἔστι τὸ σῶμά nov'” ἀρρήτῳ 
\ 1 / ^ \ / c ^ » 
γὰρ ἐνεργείᾳ μεταποιεῖται, κὰν φαίνηται ἡμῖν ἄρτος. 
P. G. exxiii., 444. 


In Marc. xiv. 23 
Εὐλογήσας δὲ ἀντὶ τοῦ εὐχαριστήσας, ἔκλασε τὸν 
ἄρτον. Ὅπερ καὶ ἡμεῖς ποιοῦμεν, εὐχὰς ἐπιλέγοντες. 
P. G. exxiii., 649. 


In Joan. vi. 48-52 

Οὐ γὰρ εἶπεν, ὅτι “O ἄρτος ὃν ἐγὼ δώσω. ἀντίτυπόν 
ἐστι τῆς σαρκός μου." ἀλλ᾽ “ἡ σάρξ μοῦ ἐστι." Mera- 
^ © © ^ 
ποιεῖται γὰρ ἀπορρήτοις λόγοις ὁ ἄρτος οὗτος διὰ τῆς 
m^ , , M , , m^ c , , 
μυστικῆς εὐλογίας, καὶ ἐπιφοιτήσεως τοῦ Ἁγίου Tlvev- 

ματος, εἰς σάρκα τοῦ Κυρίου. P. G. exxiii., 1308. 


In 1 Cor. xiv. 16 
ες "Ea JA , ^ , ss , - a 
ἃν εὐλογήσῃς τῷ πνεύματι,͵ τουτέστι, τῷ πνευμα 
^ / \ ^ , "e ^ \ 
τίκῳ χαρίσματι διὰ τῆς γλώσσης. “o ἀναπληρῶν TOV 
τόπον τοῦ ἰδιώτου. τουτέστι, ὁ λαικός, “πῶς ἐρεῖ τὸ 
, M , ^ ^ Le: » ^ 39 m \ , , Ν (6 , \ 
Αμὴν ἐπὶ τῇ σῇ εὐχῇ; Lod γὰρ εἰπόντος τὸ “eis τοὺς 
^ ^ , ^ , 
αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων. ἀσαφῶς καὶ ἐν γλώσσῃ. οὐκ ἤκουσεν * 
ὥστε οὔτε ὠφελεῖται. P. G. exxiv., 741. 


Euthymius Zigadenus, or Zigabenus. tc. 1118 A.n. 


Panoplia Dogmatica, tit. xxv. (Quoting John Damascene) 


Καὶ νῦν ἐρωτᾷς πῶς ὁ ἄρτος γίνεται σῶμα Χριστοῦ, 
t MN 


204 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


e e ^ 
καὶ ὁ οἶνος καὶ ὕδωρ, αἷμα Χριστοῦ; Λέγω σοι κἀγώ" 


^ [74 , ^ M ^ ^ S e N , 
Πνεῦμα "Άγιον ἐπιφοιτᾷ, καὶ ταῦτα ποιεῖ τὰ ὑπὲρ λόγον 
Já 
καὶ ἔννοιαν. P. G. cxxx., 1269. 


Dionysius bar Salibi. T 1171 A.p. 
Abstract of Exposition of the Liturgy 


Postea profert illa verba, quae Dominus noster in 
coenaculo dixit, cum Sacramentum perfecit: ut per 
haee ostendat, ipsum etiam nunc esse, qui species hasce 
super Altare impositas voluntate Patris et operatione 
Spiritus per sacerdotem, qui cruces format et verba pro- 
fert, conseerat: non enim qui ministrat, sed qui super 


sacramenta invocatur, consecrationem efficit. 
ASSEMANI, Bibl. Orien. ii., 188. 


Sacerdos inclinatus dicit invocationem Spiritus Sancti. 
Miserere mei Deus Pater, etc. Hoc loco de Spiritus 
Saneti invocatione inquirendum, cur hie Spiritus Sanctus 
super panem et vinum descendit. . . . 

Ut illabens, jaciat panem etc. idest, ut ille Spiritus 
Sanetus illabatur, quem rogavi Patrem, ut mitteret. 
Populus dicit, Amen: idest fiat, ut dixisti. Postquam 
autem sacerdos Spiritum Sanctum inclinatus invocavit, 
erigit se, inquiens: Ut illabens etc. et tunc Hostiam 
cruce signat, ter quoque calicem: ut significet, ipsum 
Deum Verbum ex Patris voluntate descendere, et illabi 
in mysteria, eaque per Spiritum Sanctum perficere: 
panem quidem, ut sit Corpus; mistum vero, quod in 


calice est, ut sanguinem faciat. 
ASSEMANI, Bibl. Orien., ii., 196, 197-198. 


Germanus I. of Constantinople. Το. 740 Α.Ὀ. 


Rerum Eccl. Contemplatio (interpolated, twelfth or thirteenth 
century) 


SEEN + «T ^ , , Ν ^ , ^ \ ? , 
Αὐτὸς εἶπε OVTO ἐστι TO σωμὰ μου, τοῦτο TO αἷμα 

3) BEN \ ^ , , 3 Ν LUSIT / 
μου. Αὐτὸς καὶ τοῖς ἀποστόλοις ἐκέλευσε, καὶ δι ἐκεί- 
, ^ / ^ ^ ^ , ” 

νων ἁπάσῃ τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, τοῦτο ποιεῖν " * Τοῦτο yap, 


APPENDIX 295 


/ ςς ^ , Y , M , / ,* , A , / 
φησί, “ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν. Οὐκ ἂν ἐκέ- 
^ ^ , ^ 
λευσε τοῦτο ποιεῖν, εἰ μὴ δύναμιν ἐνθῆναι ἔμελλεν, ὥστε 
, ^ ^ \ / e , Ν ^ 
δύνασθαι τοῦτο ποιεῖν. Καὶ τίς ἡ δύναμις ; τὸ Τ]νεῦμα 
e ^ \ ^ \ ^ t , ^ 
τὸ Ἁγιον. . . . Τοῦτο διὰ τῆς χειρὸς τῶν ἱερέων καὶ τῆς 
, N . ^ 
γλώττης τὰ μυστήρια τελεσιουργεῖ. . . . 
€ x ^ ^ 
Εἶτα πάλιν ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐπαγγέλλει τῷ Θεῴ καὶ llarpı τὰ 
^ ^ ^ 
τῆς Χριστοῦ ἐνανθρωπήσεως μυστήρια, τὴν ἐξ ἁγίας παρ- 
, \ 
θένου καὶ θεοτόκου ἀνέκφραστον γέννησιν, τὴν ἄναστρο- 
býv καὶ ἐμπολίτευσιν τὴν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ, τὸν σταυρόν, τὸν 
^ y ^ ^ 
θάνατον, τὴν ἐν τῷ ἅδῃ αὐτοῦ κατάβασιν. τὴν τῶν δεσμίων 
δι αὐτοῦ ἐλευθερίαν, τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν τριήµερον καὶ ἁγίαν 
> , ^ > ^ , ^ > , / \ > ^ 
ἀνάστασιν, τὴν ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς ἀνάληψνί, τὴν ἐκ δεξιῶν 
^ ^ M 
τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Πατρὸς καθέδραν. τὴν δευτέραν καὶ µέλλου- 
σαν αὐτοῦ ἔνδοξον παρουσίαν πάλιν, τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς... . 
A ^ ^ * > 
Kai παρακαλεῖ πάλιν τελειῶσαι τὸ μυστήριον τοῦ Υἱοῦ 
^ ^ K Já ^ 
αὐτοῦ, καὶ γεννηθῆναι, ἤτοι µεταποιηθῆναι αὐτὸν τὸν 
N Ν ^ "^ ^ 
ἄρτον καὶ τὸν οἶνον. eis σῶμα Kal αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ 
Θεοῦ. . . . 
μας { ^ ^ ^ , 
Ὅθεν καὶ τὸ "Άγιον Πνεῦμα τῇ εὐδοκίᾳ τοῦ llarpos, 
M / ^ δ κι > / , e / A 
καὶ βουλήσει τοῦ Tiod, ἀοράτως παρόν. ὑποδεικνύει τὴν 
/ / ^ ^ 
θείαν ἐνεργίαν, καὶ τῇ χειρὶ τοῦ ἱερέως ἐπισφραγίζει, καὶ 
, \ ^ A / es ^ > ^ 
μεταβάλλει καὶ τελεοῖ τὰ προκείμενα ἅγια δῶρα: εἰς σῶμα 
\ = ^ / e ^ , ^ ^ 
καὶ αἷμα τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. 
P. G. xeviii., 433, 436, 437. 


Theodore of Andida, after Germanus, perhaps twelfth or 
thirteenth century 
Commentatio Liturgica, $ 27 

Καὶ μετὰ τὴν ἐπαγομένην εὐχὴν ἀναδείκνυσιν ὁ ἀἄρχιε- 
ρεὺς τὰ ἅγια, λέγων" “ Kai ποίησον τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον 
αὐτὸ τὸ τιµιον σῶμα τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος 
ἡμῶν ᾿]ησοῦ Χριστοῦ" τὸ δὲ ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ τούτῳ αὐτὸ 
τὸ τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, μεταβαλὼν τῷ Πνεύ- 
µατί σου τῷ ᾿Αγίῳ, τὸ ἐκχυθὲν ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου 
ζωῆς" ἃ δὴ καὶ γινώσκομεν καὶ πιστεύομεν, οὕτω µετα- 
ποιεῖσθαι ὡς ἡ ἐπίκλησις ἔχει. P. G. exl., 452, 453. 


296 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Manuel, Great Rhetor of the Great Church of Constantinople 
Reply to Friar Francis (c. 1240 a.p.), ὃ 8 


"Er περὶ τῶν θείων καὶ μυστικῶν λέγεις συμβόλων. 
τοῦ θείου καὶ Δεσποτικοῦ δηλαδὴ σώματος, ὅτι μόνα τὰ 
ῥήματα τοῦ Κυρίου, * Λάβετε, φάγετε. καὶ miete, µετα- 
βάλλουσι καὶ τελειοῦσιν αὐτά, οὐ μὴν καὶ αἱ θεῖαι τῶν 
ἁγίων εὐχαὶ καὶ ἱεραὶ ἐπῳδαί. "Ἡμεῖς δὲ αὐτὰ τὰ θεῖα 
καὶ Δεσποτικὰ ῥήματα πρὸς τελείωσίν φαμεν αὐτῶν, καὶ 
ἡ τῆς ἱερωσύνης δύναμις διὰ τῶν θείων εὐχῶν καὶ ἐπῳδῶν 
τοῦ ἱεροῦ τυχὸν Ἀρισοστόμου ἢ τοῦ μεγάλου Βασιλείου. 
To γὰρ θεῖον τῆς ἱερωσύνης χάρισμα διὰ τοῦτο ὑπὸ τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ δέδοται τοῖς ἀποστόλοις. καὶ ἐξ ἐκείνων ἀλληλο- 
διαδόχως. καὶ πρὸς ἡμῶν ἱερεῖς εἰς τὸ τελειοῦν κατὰ τὰ 
θεῖα δῶρα. διὰ τῆς ἐπικλήσεως καὶ ἐπιφοιτήσεως τοῦ 
Παναγίου Πνεύματος. Οὕτως ἡμεῖς περὶ τούτων φρονοῦ- 
pev καὶ λέγομεν ὀρθοδόξως καὶ ἀποστολικοπατροπαρα- 
δότως. P. G. exl., 481. 


Nicholas Cabasilas of Thessalonica. + 1571 a.p. 
Ἑρμηνεία τῆς θείας λειτουργία». Chap. xxvii.-xxx. 
xxvii. Περὶ τοῦ ἁγιασμοῦ τῶν δώρων καὶ τῆς πρὸ τούτου εὐχαριστίας. 
Οὕτω δὲ κάλλιστα καὶ ἱερώτατα διατεθέντα. τί λοιπόν. 
3 \ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 
ἢ πρὸς εὐχαριστίαν τραπῆναι τοῦ χορηγοῦ τῶν ἀγαθῶν 
^ \ ^ 
ἁπάντων Θεοῦ; ἄλλως τε τὸν πρῶτον ἱερέα μιμούμενος 
εὐχαριστοῦντα τῷ Θεῷ καὶ llarpí, πρὸ τοῦ παραδοῦναι τὸ 
μυστήριον τῆς κοινωνίας, καὶ αὐτὸς πρὸ τῆς τελεστικῆς 
εὐχῆς, καθ᾽ ἦν ἱερουργεῖ τὰ ἅγια, τὴν εὐχαριστίαν ταύτην 
ποιεῖται πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν καὶ Πατέρα τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν 
3 ^ r ^ ^ 7 s 
]ησοῦ Χριστοῦ" ““Εὐχαριστήσωμεν τῷ Ἰυρίῳ”' καὶ 
/ 9 , \ oo A Ν δί vith ee) , 
πάντων συνθεμένων καὶ ξιον καὶ δίκαιον " ἀνειπόντων., 
ορ ον 3 ἰς x \ , / , / A Ns \ 
αὐτὸς ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ τὴν εὐχαριστίαν ἀναφέρει τῷ ©ew" καὶ 
\ y. 
δοξολογήσας αὐτὸν καὶ μετὰ ἀγγέλων ὑμνήσας καὶ χάρι- 
€ ^ ^ lá , ^ ^ ^ 
τας ὁμολογήσας τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἁπάντων τῶν ἐξ αἰῶνος ἡμῖν 
3 ^ ^ > ^ ^ 
παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ γενομένων. Kai τελευταῖον αὐτῆς τῆς ἀρρήτου 


APPENDIX 297 


^ € \ / e ^ u ^ s ^ , , 
και υπερ λογον Ίμων ενεκα TOU -WTNPOS οικονομια» [LVT)- 


, s € ^ \ / ^ \ c / m 
σθείς, εἶτα ἱερουργεῖ τὰ τίμια δῶρα, καὶ ἡ θυσία πᾶσα 
^ La , , ^ x m 
τελεῖται. Kai τίνα τρόπον; To φρικτὸν ἐκεῖνο διηγησά- 
µενος δεῖπνον καὶ ὅπως αὐτὸ παρέδωκε πρὸ τοῦ πάθους 
^ ^ ^ / 
τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ μαθηταῖς καὶ ὡς ἐδέξατο ποτήριον καὶ 
t D , / 5 
ὡς ἔλαβεν ἄρτον καὶ εὐχαριστίαν ἡγίασε καὶ ὡς εἶπε δι᾽ 
τ / ey 
ὧν ἐδήλωσε τὸ μυστήριον, καὶ αὐτὰ τὰ ῥήματα ἀνειπὼν 
εἶτα προσπίπτει καὶ εὔχεται καὶ ἱκετεύει, τὰς θείας 
ἐκείνας φωνὰς τοῦ μονογενοῦς Υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Σωτῆρος 
^ , ^ , ^ 
ἡμῶν ἐφαρμόσας καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν προκειμένων δώρων, καὶ 
δεξάµενα τὸ Πανάγιον αὐτοῦ καὶ παντοδυνάµενον 1 νεῦμα 
^ \ \ » 2 , M \ / A 
μεταβεβληθῆναι τὸν μὲν ἄρτον εἰς αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον καὶ 
^ M > \ \ / ^ 
ἅγιον σῶμα, τὸν δὲ οἶνον εἰς αὐτὸ τὸ ἄχραντον αὐτοῦ 
καὶ ἅγιον αἷμα. 
7 ^ ^ [4 
Τούτων δὲ εἰρημένων, τὸ πᾶν τῆς ἱερουργίας ἤνυσται 
\ 4 \ \ δῶ € , 0 te. / , 
καὶ τετέλεσται καὶ τὰ δῶρα ἡγιάσθη καὶ ἡ θυσία ἀπηρ- 
τίσθη καὶ τὸ μέγα θῦμα καὶ ἱερεῖον τὸ ὑπὲρ τοῦ κόσμου 
^ ^ e ^ , € 
σφαγὲν ἐπὶ τῆς ἱερᾶς τραπέζης ὁρᾶται κείμενον. "O γὰρ 
» ^ 77 ^ z , ^ 
ἄρτος τοῦ Κυριακοῦ σώματος οὐκ ἔτι τύπος οὐδὲ δῶρον, 
9 47 / ^ , 9 ^ ὃ , δὲ , , 
εἰκόνα φέρων τοῦ ἀληθινοῦ δώρου οὐδὲ γραφήν τινα κομί- 
ζων ἐν ἑαυτῷ τῶν σωτηρίων παθῶν ὥσπερ ἐν πίνακι, ἀλλ᾽ 
> \ \ A Ν m^ , \ "^ , ^ / 
αὐτὸ τὸ ἀληθινὸν δῶρον. αὐτὸ τοῦ Δεσπότου τοῦ Παναγίου 
^ Ν > ^ , , ^ ^ , / ^ 
σῶμα, τὸ πάντα ἀληθῶς δεξάμενον ἐκεῖνα τὰ ὀνείδη, τὰς 
ei \ , \ M ^ 
ὕβρεις, τοὺς μώλωπας ' τὸ σταυρωθέν. τὸ σφαγέν, τὸ 
^ , \ Tá , \ \ e / 
μαρτυρῆσαν ἐπὶ llovriov Πιλάτου τὴν καλὴν ὁμολογίαν, 
M N , , 
τὸ pamıodev, τὸ αἰκισθέν, τὸ ἐμπτύσματα ἀνασχόμενον, 
Ν ^ c y E M © 
τὸ χολῆς γευσάµενον. Ὁμοίως καὶ ὁ οἶνος αὐτὸ TO αἷμα 
τὸ ἐκπηδῆσαν σφαττοµένου τοῦ σώματος. τοῦτο τὸ σῶμα 
^ X Ν c , x 
τοῦτο τὸ αἷμα τὸ συστὰν ἐκ Πνεύματος Ἁγίου, τὸ γεννη- 
Ν ^ \ ^ ^ 
θὲν ἀπὸ τῆς παρθένου, τὸ ταφέν, τὸ ἀναστὰν τῇ τριτῇ 
[4 / \ > ' , \ , \ \ 9 / , 
ἡμέρᾳ, τὸ ἀνελθὸν εἰς τοὺς οὐρανοὺς καὶ καθεζόμενον ἐκ 
δεξιῶν τοῦ Πατρός. 


xxviii. Πόθεν ἀσφαλῶς πιστεύομεν τὸ μυστήριον. ' 


, , - ^ ^ , 
Καὶ τίς ἡ πίστιξ; Αὐτὸς εἶπε" “ Τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά 


298 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


^ \ © / 49 , x \ A > le , , 
µου, τοῦτο TO αἷμά µου, αὐτὸς καὶ τοῖς ἀποστόλοις ἐκέ- 
^ , ^ ^ 
λευσε καὶ δι ἐκείνων τῇ πάσῃ ἐκκλησίᾳ, τοῦτο ποιεῖν. 
ες ^ , 59 ες ^ , \ 3 \ > , 99 
Τοῦτο yap,” φησι, “ποιεῖτε eis τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν, 
3 ^ ^ ^ , 
οὐκ ἂν κελεύσας τοῦτο ποιεῖν, εἰ μὴ δύναμιν ἐνθήσειν 
i A A / ΄ 
ἔμελλε, ὥστε δύνασθαι τοῦτο ποιεῖν. Kai τίς ἡ δύναμις ; 
^ κο el \ € , 
τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ "Άγιον, ἡ ἐξ ὕψους τοὺς ἀποστόλους ὁπλί- 
M \ x ^ 
caca δύναμις, κατὰ TO εἰρημένον πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὑπὸ τοῦ 
c ^ , ^ , 
Κυρίου" ““Ὕμεϊῖς δὲ καθίσατε ἐν τῇ πόλει ᾿Ἱερουσαλήμ, 
e ^ NEN: ^ 
ἕως οὗ ἐνδύσησθε ἐξ ὕψους." Τοῦτο τὸ ἔργον ἐκείνης τῆς 
, ^ , 
kafočov. Οὐ γὰρ κατελθὸν ἅπαξ, εἶτα ἀπολέλοιπεν 
€ ^ , \ pre ^ , M » / Me \ 
ἡμᾶς, ἀλλὰ μεθ ἡμῶν ἐστι καὶ ἔσται µέχρι mavros. Διὰ 
^ \ » νε πι , e , ιο ο , 
τοῦτο γὰρ ἔπεμψεν αὐτὸ ὁ Σωτήρ. ἵνα μένῃ μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν eis 
\ In N ^ ^ , / ο AR, n — , / 
τὸν αἰῶνα, τὸ Πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας. 0 ὁ κόσμος οὐ δύναται 
^ ei ^ \ [4 ^ 
λαβεῖν, ὅτι οὐ θεωρεῖ αὐτὸ οὐδὲ γινώσκει αὐτό, ὑμεῖς δὲ 
, , e , ^ , ^ 
γινώσκετε αὐτό, ὅτι παρ ὑμῖν μένει καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν ἔσται. 
^ ^ ^ , ^ 
τοῦτο διὰ τῆς χειρὸς καὶ τῆς γλώσσης τῶν ἱερέων τὰ 
7, ^ K ^ > A σ ^ , 
μυστήρια τελεσιουργεῖ. Kai οὐ τὸ “Αγιον Πνεῦμα µόνον 
» € οι e ^ e [4 αν. e ^ > \ N 
ἔπεμψεν ὁ Ἰκύριος ἡμῖν, ὥστε μένειν μεθ ἡμῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ 
\ e , ^ ^ 
αὐτὸς ὁ Κύριος ἐπηγγείλατο. μένειν μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν ἕως τῆς 
^ ^ n , e P > / 
συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος" ἀλλ᾽ ὁ ΠἩαράκλητος ἀοράτως 
/ e ^ μον , sl. Z ε \ , 
πρόσεστιν, ὅτι σῶμα αὐτὸς οὐκ ἐφόρεσεν, ὁ δὲ Κύριος 
e ^ ^ , , ^ ^ ^ 
καὶ ὁρᾶται καὶ ἁφῆς ἀνέχεται, διὰ τῶν φρικτῶν καὶ ἱερῶν 
» \ 
μυστηρίων, ὡς ἂν τὴν ἡμετέρα φύσιν καὶ δεξάμενος καὶ 
^ ^ ei ^ © 
φέρων εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. Αὕτη τῆς ἱερωσύνης δύναμις, οὗτος 
re , , / e e A \ \ is 
ὁ ἱερεύς. Ov γάρ. ἅπαξ ἑαυτὸν προσαγαγὼν καὶ θύσας. 
, ^ tá / ^ ^ 
ἐπαύσατο τῆς ἱερωσύνης. ἀλλὰ διηνεκῆ ταύτην λειτουργεῖ 
\ , (Am IN θ᾽ ^ M TI , en S 
τὴν λειτουργίαν ἡμῖν, ka ἣν καὶ Παράκλητος ἡμῖν ἐστι 
^ A M . ^ © , » \ / 
πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν δι αἰῶνος, οὗ χάριν εἴρηται πρὸς αὐτόν" 
ες NUN e \ , N ^ 949 N ^ , , ^ 
Σὺ ἱερεὺς eis τὸν αἰῶνα. Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδεμία τοῖς 
^ \ o e ^ ^ , , , DANS! 
πιστοῖς περὶ τοῦ ἁγιασμοῦ τῶν δώρων ἀμφιβολία οὐδὲ 
\ ^ » ^ > N x / \ SS 
περὶ τῶν ἄλλων τελετῶν, εἰ κατὰ τὴν πρόθεσιν καὶ τὰς 
A ^ E ^ ^ 
εὐχὰς τῶν ἱερέων ἀποτελοῦνται. Καὶ ταῦτα μὲν εἰς 
τοσοῦτον. 


ΧΧΙΧ. Περὶ ὧν ἡμῖν ἐνταῦθά τινες Λατῖνοι μέμφονται, καὶ πρὸς μέμψιν 
ἀπολογία. 


APPENDIX 299 


Ἐνταῦθα δέ τινες Λατῖνοι τῶν ἡμετέρων ἐπιλαμάβνον- 
AJ ^ / 
ται. Φασὶ γάρ, μετὰ τὸν τοῦ Κυρίου λόγον, τὸ “Λάβετε, 
\ \ ^ Ν ^ ^ 
φάγετε᾽᾽ κ.τ.ὲ. πρὸς τὸ ἁγιασθῆναι τὰ δῶρα μηδεμιᾶς 
^ y ^ e \ ^ r - , 
εὐχῆς ἔτι δεῖσθαι, ὡς ὑπὸ τοῦ Ιυριακοῦ λόγου τελούμενα. 
^ ^ ^ ^ A NP. , 

Διὰ τοῦτο οἱ μετὰ τὸ ἀνειπεῖν ταῦτα τὰ ῥήματα, ἄρτον καὶ 
οἶνον κατονοµάζοντες καὶ ὡς μήπω ἁγιασθεῖσιν εὐχόμενοι 
A ε , \ ^5 , ^ \ , , 
τὸν ἁγιασμόν, πρὸς τῷ ἀπιστίᾳ νοσεῖν, pact, καὶ µάταιόν 
τι καὶ παρέλκον πρᾶγμα ποιοῦσιν. "Ότι δὲ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ 

, e A ^ ^ e , , » / 
λόγος ὁ τὰ δῶρα τελειῶν, ὁ μακάριός, φασι, Ἀρυσόστομος 


* καθάπερ ὁ δημιουργικὸς λόγος, TO 


^ , ei 
μαρτυρεῖ λέγων, ὅτι 
> ^, » e ^ ^ 
Αὐξάνεσθε καὶ πληθύνεσθε εἴρηται μὲν ἅπαξ ὑπὸ τοῦ 
es ^ ei \ c ei 
Θεοῦ, ἐνεργεῖται δὲ ἀεί, οὕτω καὶ ὁ λόγος οὕτως, ἅπαξ 
t M δ \ ^ > ^ ὃ \ A , ^ 25 e / 
ῥηθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ Σωτῆρος. διὰ παντὸς ἐνεργεῖ. Οἱ τοίνυν 
^ e ^ > ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ , 
τη ἑαυτῶν εὐχῇ θαρροῦντες μᾶλλον ἢ τῷ Κυριακώ λόγω. 
^ > ^ , 
πρῶτον μὲν ἀσθένειαν αὐτοῦ καταγινώσκουσιν, ἔπειτα 
t ^ ^ , ^ 5 ^ , > 
ἑαυτοῖς θαρροῦντες φαίνονται μᾶλλον καὶ τρίτον ἀμφι- 
, , ^ , , ^ \ 
βόλου πράγματος τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης εὐχῆς τὸ μυστήριον 
^ ^ ^ 9 ^ 
ἐξαρτῶσι, πρᾶγμα τοσοῦτον, kai ᾧ δεῖ βεβαιότατα πι- 
΄ , / Να δ / hs \ 3 Ay 
στεύειν ἀμφιβολίας μεστὸν ἀποφαίνουσιν " οὐ γὰρ ἀνάγκη 
AJ , jj \ , ty A 5 Lon! \ > / 
τὸν εὐχόμενον καὶ εἰσακούεσθαι. κἂν ἢ Παὖλος τὴν ἀρετήν. 
^ , ^ 
Ταῦτα δὲ πάντα λύειν οὐ χαλεπόν. Kai πρῶτον ἀπ᾽ 
^ ^ ^ > .. 
αὐτῶν τῶν τοῦ θείου ᾿Ἰωάννου ῥήματων, ois διϊσχυρίζονται, 
, \ ^ © 
ἀρκτέον. Ei γὰρ κατὰ TOV δημιουργικὸν λόγον καὶ οὗτος 
t , ^ ^ 5 ε \ 
ὁ λόγος δύναται, σκοπῶμεν ἐκεῖνο. Eirev ὁ Θεὸς “ AvEa- 
\ ΄ A p" og \ \ , S 
νεσθε kai πληθύνεσθε τί οὖν ; μετὰ τον λόγον ἐκεῖνον 
, ^ \ a , \ / e A , \ » 
οὐδενὸς πρὸς τοῦτο δεόμεθα ; καὶ χρεία ἡμῖν οὐδενὸς ἄλλου 
x \ » A 
προς τὴν αὔξησιν οὐδεμία ; ἢ kal γάμου kai συναφείας 
^ ^ ^ » , / \ 4 \ > 
δεῖ καὶ τῆς ἄλλης ἐπιμελείας, καὶ τούτων χωρὶς οὐ δυνα- 
\ \ ^ ^ 
τὸν συνεστάναι TO γένος καὶ προχωρεῖν; Οὐκοῦν καθάπερ 
^ \ A ^ N 
ἐκεῖ πρὸς παιδοποιῖαν ἀναγκαῖον ἡγούμεθα τὸν γάμον καὶ 
^ e A ^ , , 
μετὰ τὸν γάμον ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τούτου πάλιν εὐχόμεθα. καὶ οὐ 
δοκοῦμεν ἀτιμάζειν τὸν δηµιουργικον λόγον. εἰδότες αἴτιον 
x ^ ^ ' ^ , 
αὐτὸν τῆς γενέσεως, ἀλλὰ τὸν τρόπον τοῦτον διὰ γάμου, 
διὰ τροφῆς, διὰ τῶν ἄλλων, οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα πιστεύομεν 
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 
αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν ἐνεργοῦντα τὸ μυστήριον τὸν τοῦ Kupíov 


300 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


λόγον, GAN οὕτω διὰ ἱερέως καὶ διὰ ἐντεύξεως αὐτοῦ καὶ 
, ^ » \ \ , , ^ [4 ^ 068 v 
εὐχῆς. Οὐ γὰρ διὰ πάντων ἐνεργεῖν ἁπλῶς οὐδὲ ὅπως 
, > \ \ N 7 © \ , / 
δήποτε. ἀλλὰ πολλὰ τὰ ζητούμενα, ὧν χωρις οὐ ποιήσει 
\ € en ^ \ γ r / , 3 5 € 
τὰ ἑαυτοῦ. Τὸν δὲ Χριστοῦ θάνατον τίς οὐκ οἶδεν, ὡς 
> / € \ ^ ^ \ 
αὐτός ἐστι μόνος ὁ τὴν ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν εἰσενεγκὼν 
, ^ , e \ 
εἰς τὸν κόσμον; ἀλλὰ κἀκεῖνο γινώσκομεν: ὅτι μετὰ τὸν 
θάνατον ἐκεῖνον καὶ πίστεως χρεία καὶ μετανοίας καὶ 
ἐξομολογήσεως καὶ τῆς τῶν ἱερέων εὐχῆς. καὶ οὐκ ἔστι 
λυθῆναι τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἄνθρωπον, μὴ τούτων ἡγησαμένων. 
5 \ , ^ 
Τί οὖν: ἀτιμάζομεν τὸν θάνατον ἐκεῖνον καὶ ἀσθενείαν 
^ , [ N ^ , 
αὐτοῦ καταγινώσκοµεν. ὅτι νομίζομεν, μὴ ἀρκεῖν τὰ παρ 
, \ ^ ^ 
ἐκείνου, ἐὰν μὴ kai τὰ παρ) ἡμῶν αὐτῶν ELGEVÉJKO EV : 
> ^ , £x JOE ^ , / c \ ἘΣ 
οὐδαμῶς. Οὐκοῦν οὐδὲ τοῖς εὐχομένοις ὑπὲρ τοῦ τελειω- 
θῆναι τὰ δῶρα τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐγκαλεῖν εὔλογον, ἐπεὶ οὐδέ, τῇ 
εὐχῇ θαρροῦντες, ἑαυτοῖς θαρροῦσιν. ἀλλὰ τῷ δώσειν ἐπαγ- 
γειλαμένῳ Θεώ. Tovvavriov μὲν γὰρ ὁ τῆς εὐχῆς ἀπαιτεῖ 
^ \ ^ M \ ^ 
λόγος ' τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι TO τοινῦν τὴν εὐχὴν τοῖς εὐχομένοις 
en A = ^ \ ^ 
τὸ μὴ θαρρεῖν ἑαυτοῖς περὶ τῶν ζητοµένων. ἀλλὰ παρὰ τῷ 


^ € 


Θεώ μόνῳ πιστεύειν εὑρήσειν αὐτά" καὶ τοῦτο βοᾷ ο 
> F. » © € N , * » ^ M , 
εὐχόμενος. δι ὧν ἑαυτὸν adeis, εἰς τὸν Θεὸν καταφεύγει. 
ὡς τῆς ἑαυτοῦ κατέγνω δυνάμεως, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τῷ Θεῷ 
\ ^ , / , , , Lo , N ^ , ^ 
τὸ πᾶν ἐπιτρέπεις. Οὐκ ἐμόν, φησι, τοῦτο οὐδὲ τῆς ἐμῆς 
, , 5) , ^ ‘ x ^ » / \ 
ἰσχύος. ἀλλά σου δεῖται Kal σοι TO πᾶν ἀνατίθημι καὶ 
, er ^ , , , 
μάλιστ᾽ ὅτου ὑπὲρ φύσιν καὶ πάντα νικῶντα λόγον, EUX@- 
μεθα, οἷα τὰ τῶν μυστηρίων. Τότε γὰρ τῷ Θεῷ μόνῳ 
θαρρεῖν τοὺς εὐχομένους πᾶσα ἀνάγκη. Ταῦτα γὰρ οὔτε 
^ ^ 5 ^ ^ 
ἐνθυμηθῆναι δυνατὸν ἦν ἄνθρωπον, μὴ τοῦ Θεοῦ διδάξαν- 
^ M / 

Tos, οὔτε ἐπιθυμῆσαι, μὴ ἐκείνου παραινέσαντος, οὔτε 
a ^ \ ^ ^ ^ / 
προσδοκῆσαι λαβεῖν, μὴ τοῦ ἀψευδοῦς τοῦτο ἐλπίσαντος " 
e δὲ » \ , 2 , ^ )8 ph , 
ὥστε οὐδὲ εὔξασθαι περὶ τούτων ἐτόλμησεν ἂν οὐδείς. εἰ 
SY > Ν » » ^ e » , ^ ^ , 
μὴ αὐτὸς ἔδειξεν ἀσφαλῶς, ὡς dpa αἰτεῖσθαι ταῦτα βού- 
λεται καὶ χορηγεῖν τοῖς αἰτουμένοις ἑτοίμως ἔχει. Διὰ 
m , M , , , ^ € , N , Ν A z 
τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀμφίβολος ἐνταῦθα ἡ εὐχὴ οὐδὲ τὸ πέρας 

4 » 3 ^ ^ ^ r , 

ἄδηλον ἔχει αὐτοῦ τοῦ δοῦναι Κυρίου διὰ πάντων δείξαν- 
ei , ^ ^ ^ / ^ 

Tos, ὅτι βούλεται δοῦναι. Διὰ TOUTO τῶν μυστηρίων TOV 


APPENDIX 301 


^ ^ > ^ ^ id / , 
ἁγιασμὸν τῇ εὐχῇ TOU ἱερέως πιστεύομεν, οὐχ ὡς ἀνθρω- 
, e ^ , ^ > 
πίνῃ τινί, AAN ὡς Θεοῦ δυνάμει θαρροῦντες. Ov γὰρ διὰ 
\ , » M , 
τὸν εὐχόμενον ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸν ἐπακούοντα Θεόν, 
ΩΣ» ce , ^ , 9 "a 
οὐδ᾽ ὅτι ἐκεῖνος ἐδεήθη, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἡ ᾿Αλήθεια ἐπεγγείλατο 
, f, € \ » 4 
δώσειν. "Οτι δὲ ὁ Χριστὸς ἔδειξεν, ὡς βούλεται ταύτην 
, A lá m ^ 
ἀεὶ διδόναι τὴν χάριν. οὐδὲ λόγου δεῖται. Διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ 
, \ M 5» \ > ή AA , / \ f* 
εἰς τὴν γὴν ἦλθε καὶ ἐτύθη καὶ ἀπέθανε, διὰ τοῦτο θυσια- 
στήρια καὶ ἱερεῖς καὶ πᾶσα κάθαρσις καὶ πᾶσαι ἐντολαί, 
διδασκαλίαι καὶ παραινέσεις, ἵνα τὴν τράπεζαν παραθῆ 
ταύτην ἡμῖν, διὰ τοῦτο καὶ τοῦ πάσχα ἐπιθυμῆσαι ἔλεγεν 
, / e ^ » ο s N 
ἐκείνου, ὅτι τοῦτο ἔμελλε τηνικαῦτα παραδιδόναι τὸ ἀληθι- 
νὸν πάσχα τοῖς μαθηταῖς. Διὰ τοῦτο ἐκέλευσε “ τοῦτο 
ποιεῖν εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν. ὅτι τοῦτο βούλεται ἱερουρ- 
γεῖσθαι ἀεὶ παρ᾽ ἡμῶν. Tis οὖν ἔτι περὶ τοῦ ζητουμένου 
^ , / » / / s. 3 , / / 
τοῖς εὐχομένοις ἀμφιβολογία γένοιτ᾽ ἄν. εἰ λήψονται μέν, 
e ^ e ^ 
o δέονται οὗτοι λαβεῖν, ὁ δὲ δοῦναι δυνάμενος διδόναι 
, ^ 7] \ \ ^ ; ^ TAPA 
ἐπιθυμεῖ; Οὕτως οἱ τὸν ἀγιασμὸν τῶν δώρων T? εὐχῆ 
πιστεύοντες, οὔτε τοῦ Σωτῆρος τὰς φωνὰς περιορῶσιν οὔτε 
A ^ » , \ , 
ἑαυτοῖς θαρροῦσιν οὔτε ἀμφιβόλου πράγματος τὸ µυστή- 
ριον ἐξαρτῶσι τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης εὐχῆς. ὡς οἱ Λατῖνοι μάτην 
^ \ FK € ^ / 
ἐγκαλοῦσιν, ἐπεὶ καὶ τὸ πανάγιον μύρον, ὁ τῇ θείᾳ κοινω- 
e , , 5 ^ ^ 
via ὁ μακάριος Διονύσιός φησιν ὑποταγὲς εἶναι, τῇ εὐχῇ 
^ r , ^ 
τελεῖται καὶ ἁγιάζεται, καὶ ὡς εἴη τελεστικὴ καὶ ἁγια- 
, > ͵7ὔ ^ > , , / \ u ^ot , 
στική, οὐδεμία τοῖς εὐσεβέσιν ἀμφιβολία, καὶ ἡ τοῦ ἱερέως 
^ , ^ ^ 
χειροτονία τὸν ἴσον τρόπον kal ἡ TOU ἀρχιερέως διὰ τῆς 
> ^ t ^ ες E > , , 99 ος e \ > a 
εὐχῆς ἱερουργεῖται. ὐξώμεθα yap,” φησιν, “ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ. 
“ » , , , \ € , ^ / 7 , 93, 
ἵνα ἔλθοι ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν ἡ χάρις τοῦ Παναγίου Πνεύματος. 
\ ^ ^ e ^ \ \ 
Μετὰ τὴν ἐπίθεσιν τῆς χεῖρος ὁ χειροτονῶν πρὸς τὸν 
κλῆρον Boa" καὶ ἡ ἐν τῇ τῶν Λατίνων δὲ ἐκκλησίᾳ τελου- 
[3 ε t 
, / ^ [4 , N X , \ / M 
μένη χειροτονία του ἱερέως, μετὰ το ἐπιχέαι TO μύρον ἐπὶ 
^ ^ ^ c ^ » 
τῆς κεφαλῆς τοῦ xeiporovovuévov, ὁ τελῶν εὔχεται τὴν 
, ae , Á , , , A ^ / [- 
χάριν τοῦ Αγίου Πνεύματος ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν κατελθεῖν πλουσίαν 
καὶ ἄφεσις ἁμαρτιῶν τοῖς μετανοοῦσι διὰ τῆς εὐχῆς τῶν 
+ / % ^ ^ ^ 
ἱερέων δίδοται" καὶ τὸ τελευταῖον τοῦ ἐλαίου μυστήριον 
^ e , ^ e \ 
ὡσαύτως ἡ τῶν ἱερέων εὐχὴ τελεσιουργεῖ, ὁ kal ἴασιν 


302 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


σωματικῆς νόσου καὶ ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν τοῖς τελουμένοις 
, e € » \ / » ες 2 A , 
δύναται, ὡς ἡ ἀποστολικὴ παράδοσις ἔχει " ''᾿Ασθενεῖ γάρ 
OA ες XC 0 \ B / ^ 
τις ἐν ὑμῖν.) φησι. * προκαλέσασθε τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους τῆς 
3 , \ , ε \ , ^ , D 
ἐκκλησίας καὶ προσευξάσθωσαν ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ, ἀλείψαντες 
, A 3 / , ^ 3 , “Ὁ / \ e 3 ^ ^ 
αὐτὸν ἐλαίῳ ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ Κυρίου. καὶ 7) εὐχὴ τῆς 
, ^ 
πίστεως σώσει τὸν καμόντα καὶ ἐγερεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ Κύριος, 
κἂν ἁμαρτίας ἢ πεποιηκὼς. ἀφεθήσεται αὐτώ. Οἱ τοίνυν 
\ ^ » , 
τὴν εὐχὴν ἐν τοῖς μυστηρίοις ἀποδοκιμάζοντες τί πρὸς 
^ ^ N 4 ^ ^ 
ταῦτα ἐροῦσιν; εἰ γὰρ ἄδηλον TO παρὰ τῶν εὐχῶν, ὡς 
, \ / » M e [4 7 , (9 » ^ 
αὐτοὶ λέγουσιν. ἄδηλον μὲν ὁ ἱερεύς, εἰ TOUT ἔστιν, ὃ 
^ » \ \ ΄ , , e , it 
καλεῖται" ἄδηλον δὲ τὸ μύρον, εἰ δύναται ἁγιάζειν *. kal 
οὕτως οὐδὲ τὸ μυστήριον συνεστάναι δύναται τῆς ἱερᾶς 
κοινωνίας. οὔτε ἱερέως ἀληθῶς ὄντος οὔτε θυσιαστηρίου. 
» , A ^ , 
Οὔτε γὰρ παρὰ ἰδιώτου λεγόμενον τὸν τοῦ Κυρίου λόγον 
Lay Β , , » ^ 
τελεσιουργίαν φαῖεν ἂν οὐδ᾽ αὐτοὶ οὔτε χωρὶς τοῦ θυσια- 
\ 2 ^ 
στηρίου " kai γὰρ καὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, ἐν © δεῖ τιθέναι 
^ , ^ \ [4 ^ ^ 
τὸν ἄρτον, τῷ μύρῳ ἁγιάζεται, ὃ δὴ μύρον διὰ τῶν εὐχῶν 
^ UI \ \ e "^ » , e ^ 
τελεσιουργεῖται. “Ete δὲ καὶ ἁμαρτιῶν ἄφεσιν τίς ἡμῖν 
δώσει βεβαίως, τῶν ἱερέων καὶ τῆς αὐτῶν δεήσεως ἀμφι- 
βαλλομένων: καὶ οὐδὲν ἄλλο λοιπόν, ἢ πάντα τὸν Ἆρι- 
στιανισμὸν ἐκ μέσου ποιῆσαι ταῖς καινοτοµίαις ἀκολου- 
θοῦντας αὐτῶν. «Φαίνεται τοίνυν, ὡς ἐκείνοις μᾶλλον, οἱ 
ταῦτα ἀξιοῦσιν. ἐν ἀμφιβολία κεῖται τὰ τῆς ἀρετῆς. καὶ 
, μ a js ἀρετῆς. 
\ , N ^ , , ^ ^ 
πολὺν ἔχει τὸ πρᾶγμα κίνδυνον, ἀλλότρια τῶν πατρικῶν 
/ ^ ^ , ^ 
παραδύσεων καὶ τῆς ἐν αὐταῖς ἀσφαλείας ἐπινοοῦσιν. 
"Οτι μὲν yap ὁ Θεὸς εὐχόμενος ἐπινεύει καὶ δίδωσι Πνεῦμα 
“ ^ , ^ ^ 
“Άγιον τοῖς αἰτοῦσιν αὐτὸν καὶ οὐδὲν ἀδυνατεῖ τοῖς μετὰ 
/ , ^ , *, A 5 € , \ 5 / 
πίστεως αὐτοῦ δεομένοις, αὐτὸς εἶπεν ὁ Θεός ' καὶ οὐδεμία 
\ ^ M , ἮΝ ^ 3 5 eu \ δ / 
μεχανὴ τοῦ μὴ ἀληθῆ ταῦτ᾽ εἶναι. "Ότι δὲ διηγουµένοις 
e ^ ^ ^ ^ / 
ὁτιοῦν τῶν λογίων συμβαίνει τι τοιοῦτον, οὐδαμῆ λέγεται. 
ľaj ^ € 
Καὶ τὸ μὲν εὐχῇ τὰ μυστικὰ τελεῖν οἱ πατέρες παρέδοσαν, 
ἀπὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ τῶν ἐκείνους ἐκδεξάμένων παρα- 
, Já \ ^ € \ , 
λαβόντες τά τε ἄλλα. καθάπερ ἔφην. καὶ τὴν ἱερὰν evxa- 
e ΄ A 
puo Tíav, μετὰ πολλοὺς ἄλλους kal ὁ μέγας Βασίλειος καὶ 
^ , , 
Ἰωάννης ὁ Χρυσόστομος. οἱ μεγάλοι τῆς ἐκκλησίας διδά- 


APPENDIX 303 


\ ^ 
σκαλοι' ois τοὺς ἀντιλέγοντας οὐδὲ λόγου τινὸς ἀξιοῦν 
^ ^ ^ m M 
χρὴ τοῦς εὐσεβεῖν βουλομένους. Tov δὲ τοῦ Κυρίου περὶ 
^ \ 
τῶν μυστηρίων λόγον, ἐν εἴδει διηγήσεως λεγόμενον, πρὸς 
τὸν ἁγιασμὸν τῶν δώρων ἀρκεῖν, οὐδεὶς οὔτε τῶν ἀποστόλων 
οὔτε τῶν διδασκάλων εἰπὼν φαίνεται. ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι μὲν ἅπαξ 
ὑπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου λεχθείς, αὐτῷ τῷ UT ἐκείνου λέγεσθαι, ὡς 
t , ^ e , 
ὁ δημιουργικὸς λόγος ἀεὶ ἐνεργεῖ, kal ὁ μακάριός φησι 
, , IS a \ ^ ς \ ne / / ὃ ^ a AA) 
Ιωάννης ' ὅτι δὲ νῦν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἱερέως λεγόμενος διὰ τὸ ὑπ 
ἐκείνου λέγεσθαι τοῦτο δύναται, οὐδαμόθεν ἔστι μαθεῖν, 
, \ » ο} , ^ © ^ , , ^ eu , BE / 
ἐπεὶ οὐδ᾽ αὐτὸς ὁ δημιουργικὸς λόγος ἐνεργεῖ. OTL ἐφ᾽ ἑκασ- 
, € , , , , » »w , Ad 
των γενόμενος ὑπό τινος ἀνθρώπου λέγεται, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἐστὶν 
ἅπαξ ὑπὸ τοῦ Kup(íov εἰρημένος. 
ΧΧΧ. Ὅτι καὶ ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ Λατίνων ἡ τελετὴ κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν 
τελεῖται τρόπον. 
Ὃ δὲ παντελῶς αὐτοὺς ἐπιστομίζει, ὅτι καὶ ἡ Λατίνων 
, / » © , / ^ X ^ ^ / 
ἐκκλησία. eis ἣν ἀναφέρειν δοκοῦσι, μετὰ τὸν τοῦ Κυρίου 
λόγον εὔχεσθαι ὑπὲρ τῶν δώρων οὐ παραιτοῦνται. Aav- 
, \ > 7 eu , , \ A \ , » \ 
Paver δὲ αὐτούς. ὅτι οὐκ εὐθὺς μετὰ τὸν λόγον εὔχονται καὶ 
el ^ ^ > 
ὅτι οὐ σαφῶς ἁγιασμὸν αἰτοῦνται καὶ μεταβολὴν εἰς τὸ 
Κυριακὸν σῶμα. ἀλλ᾽ ἑτέροις χρῶνται ὀνόμασι πρὸς τοῦτο 
φέρουσι καὶ τὰ ταῦτα δυναμένοις ; Τίς δὲ εὐχή ; * KéXev- 
σον ἀνενεχθῆναι τὰ δῶρα ταῦτα ἐν χειρὶ ἀγγέλου εἰς τὸ 
ὑπερουράνιόν σου θυσιαστήριον." Λεγέτωσαν γάρ. τί ἐστιν 
αὐτό, τὸ ἀνενεχθῆναι τὰ δῶρα ταῦτα; ἢ γὰρ τοπικὴν μετά- 
θεσιν αὐτοῖς εὔχονται ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς καὶ τῶν κάτω τόπων εἰς 
τὸν οὐρανόν, ἢ ἀξίαν τινὰ καὶ τὴν ἀπὸ τῶν ταπεινοτέρων 
ἐπὶ τὰ ὑψηλότερα μεταβολήν. "AAN εἰς μὲν τὸ πρότερον 
ef , ea ^ , m > 3 e ^ » ^ \ 
τί ὄφελον ταύτης ἡμῖν τῆς εὐχῆς, ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἀρθῆναι τὰ 
e ^ 5 ^ 
ἅγια, ἃ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν εἶναι καὶ ἐν ἡμῖν μένειν καὶ εὐχόμεθα καὶ 
πιστεύομεν, ὡς τοῦτο ὃν τὸ εἶναι τὸν Χριστὸν μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν ἕως 
τῆς συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος; πῶς δὲ οὐ πιστεύουσιν, εἰ σῶμα 
Χριστοῦ τοῦτο γιγνώσκουσιν, ὅτι καὶ ἐν ἡμῖν ἐστι καὶ ὑπε- 
povpavıov ἐστι καὶ ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ Πατρὸς κάθηται; τρόπον 
e > , , ^ » ^ » c r Ν , 
ὅν, οἶδεν αὐτός. los δ᾽ ἂν εἴη ὑπερουράνιον τὸ μήπω 
γενόμενον αὐτὸ τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὸ ὑπερουράνιον: πῶς 


304 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


\ \ » θ , , \ > L4 M e N ^ 
δὲ καὶ ἀνενεχθήσεται ἐν χειρὶ ἀγγέλου τὸ ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν 
ἀρχὴν καὶ ἐξουσίαν καὶ δύναμιν καὶ πᾶν ὄνομα ὀνομαζό- 
μενον; Ei δὲ ἀξίαν τινὰ αὐτοῖς εὔχονται καὶ τὴν ἐπὶ τὸ 
7 5 
βέλτιον μεταβολήν, οὐκ οἶδα, εἴς τινα καταλείψουσιν ἄσε- 
/ € tá » N FERN ^ ^ ^ / 

Beías ὑπερβολήν, εἴγε καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ σῶμα τοῦ Κυρίου Ἆρισ- 
^ , ^ 
τοῦ ἀναγινώσκουσι. καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ βέλτιον καὶ ἁγιώτερον ἠξεῖν 
τι ΄ e ^ , 3 » » 
αὐτὰ πιστεύουσιν. Ὅθεν δῆλοι πάντως εἰσίν, ἄρτον ἔτι 

3 , » 
καὶ οἶνον, μήπω δεξάµενα τὸν ἁγιασμόν. εἰδότες αὐτά " καὶ 
διὰ τοῦτο εὔχονται μὲν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν, ὡς ἕτι δεομένων εὐχῆς. 
εὔχονται δὲ ἀνενεχθῆναι, ὡς ἔτι κείμενα κάτω, καὶ εἰς τὸ 
7 ^ ^ 
θυσιαστήριον, ὡς μήπω τεθυµένα. ἵνα ἐκεῖ τεθέντα τυθῶσι, 
δεῖται γὰρ ἀγγέλου χειρός, ὡς τῆς δευτέρας ἱεραρχίας τῆς 
ἀνθρωπίνης κατὰ τὸν μέγαν Διονύσιον. ὑπὸ τῆς πρώτης 
[e / ^ » [4 , > N c , N , N 
ἱεραρχίας τῶν ἀγγέλων βοηθουµένων * αὐτὴ ἡ εὐχὴ οὐδὲν 
ἕτερόν ἐστι δυναμένη τοῖς δώροις. ἢ τὴν eis τὸ Ἰυριακὸν 
^^ N πο [4 , AJ \ , \ € N 
σῶμα καὶ αἷμα μεταβολήν. Οὐ γὰρ δὴ τόπον τινὰ ὑπὲρ 
^ © ^ , ^ 
τὸν οὐρανὸν ἐξηρημένον, ἐν © δεῖ θύειν. τὸ θυσιαστήριον 
ἐκεῖνο νομιστέον" οὕτω γὰρ οὐ πολὺ διοισόµεθα τῶν ἐν 
ε ΄ , Aes) ^o» ^ / \ / 
Ἱεροσολύμοις λεγόντων ἢ ἐν τῷ ὄρει τῆς Σαμαρείας τὸν τό- 
a e ^ ^ ^ » 3753 Ν X N 
πον εἶναι, ὅπου δεῖ Θεὸν προσκυνεῖν. "AAN ἐπεὶ κατὰ τὸν 
μακάριον Παῦλον εἷς Θεός. εἷς καὶ μεσίτης Θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώ- 
πων ᾿]ησοῦς Χριστός. πάντα τὰ µεσιτείαν δυνάμενα, τὸν 
e N e ^ » , 1 \ , NS € S: , "n s δὲ 
ἁγιασμὸν ἡμῖν ἔχοντα μόνος ἐστὶν αὐτὸς ὁ Σωτήρ. Τίνα δὲ 
τὰ μεσιτείαν συνάγοντα καὶ ἁγιάζειν δυναµένα: ἱερεύς. 
£ ^ , N N N , e , 
ἱερεῖον, θυσιαστήριον. Kai γὰρ τὸ θυσιαστήριον ἁγιάζει 
κατὰ τὸν Κυρίου λόγον, τὸ θυσιασθῆναι. * Τὸ θυσιαστήριον 
, 9° A e , M ^ 2, » ^ , \ , » / 
yap,” φησι, "" τὸ ἁγιάζον τὸ δῶρον.᾽ Οὐκοῦν ἐπεὶ μόνος αὐτός 
ἐστιν ὁ ἁγιάζων, μόνος ἂν εἴη ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ ἱερεῖον καὶ θυσια- 
e ος [4 ^ s 
στήριον * καὶ ὅτι μὲν ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ ἱερεῖον, αὐτὸς εἶπεν, ** Υπὲρ 
5 ^ , .. ος , N c / > / : 99 e δὲ \ 
αὐτῶν yap,” φησιν, "ἐγὼ ἁγιάζω ἐμαυτόν" ὅτι δὲ kal 
e , ^ ΄ / αν 
θυσιαστήρ:ον. ὁ ἱερώτατος μαρτυρεῖ Διονύσιος λέγων ἐν τῷ 
περὶ τοῦ μύρου λόγῳ Ei γάρ ἐστι τὸ θειότατον ἡμῶν 
θυσιαστήριον 0 ᾿]ησοῦς ἡ θεαρχικὴ τῶν θείων νόων ἀφιέρω- 
A ^ ε 
ols, ἐν ᾧ, κατὰ τὸ λόγιον ἀφιερούμενοι καὶ μυστικῶς 9λο- 
» , 
καυτούµενοι, τὴν προσαγωγὴν ἔχομεν, ὑπερκοσμίοις ὀφθαλ- 


APPENDIX 305 


^ > s Ἂς θ , > \ θ / > 
μοῖς ἐποπτεύσωμεν τὸ θειότατον αὐτὸ θυσιαστήριον. Eis 
^ , ^ 
τοῦτο τὸ θυσιαστήριον τὸ ὑπερουράνιον τὰ δῶρα εὔχεται 
^ Sere e ^ 
ἀνενεχθῆναι ὁ ἱερεύς * ὅπερ ἐστιν ἁγιασθῆναι, εἰς αὐτὸ τὸ 
ὑπερουράνιον σῶμα τοῦ Κυρίου µεταβεβληθῆναι, οὐ τόπον 
, ^ ^ > 
ἀμείψαντα καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς γενόμενα εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν" ἐπεὶ 
^ ^ 14 x 
ὁρῶμεν αὐτὰ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ὄντα ἔτι καὶ μετὰ τὴν εὐχὴν οὐδὲν 
ἧττον" ἐπεὶ γὰρ τὸ θυσιαστήριον ἁγιάζει τὰ τεθέντα αὐτῷ 
δῶρα, ταὐτόν ἐστιν εὔξασθαι τοῖς δώροις ἁγιασθῆναι καὶ ἐν 
τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ τεθῆναι. Τίς δὲ ὁ ἁγιασμός, ὃς ἁγιάζει τὸ 
D 7)p D η > ty μ , 9A ἘΠ 
θυσιαστήριον ; τὰ τεθέντα αὐτῷ δῶρα" © αὐτὸς ὁ ἱερεὺς 
ἡγίασεν ἑαυτόν; τῷ προσενεχθῆναι τῷ Θεῷ καὶ τεθῆναι " 
ἐπεὶ γὰρ ὁ αὐτός ἐστι καὶ ἱερεὺς καὶ θυσιαστήριον καὶ 
^ “ἄρ τ δ ε σι 
ἱερεῖον, ταὐτόν ἐστιν, ὑπὸ τοῦ ἱερέως ἱερουργηθῆναι καὶ εἰς 
τὸ ἱερεῖον ἐκεῖνο μεταβεβληθῆναι καὶ ἐν τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ 
ρ κ 1). 7) 1 pia 
ἐκείνῳ τῷ ὑπερουρανίῳ ἀνατεθῆναι. Διὰ τοῦτο εἴ TL τῶν 
^ > \ » \ ^ » M , » 
τριῶν ἀπολαβὼν εὔξαιο, τὸ πᾶν ηὔξω, τὸ ζητούμενον ἔχεις. 
^ s , / c \ \ , € ^ € ^ € 
τὴν θυσίαν éréXecas. Οἱ μὲν yap map’ ὑμῖν ἱερεῖς, ὡς 
ε ^ \ \ , ^ , » \ , 
ἱερεῖον τὸν Χριστὸν βλέποντες, τοῖς δώροις εὔχονται τὴν ἐν 
> / θ / ο ὃ , \ λ / “ N DEAN 
ἐκείνῳ θέσιν, ῥήμασι διαφόροις καὶ λόγοις, ἕν τε τὸ αὐτὸ 
πρᾶγμα εὐχόμενοι. Τούτου χάριν οἱ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ἱερεῖς μετὰ 
τὸ εὔξασθαι τοῖς δώροις τὴν εἰς τὸ θεῖον σῶμα καὶ αἷμα 
μεταβολήν, μνησθέντες τοῦ ὑπερουρανίου θυσιαστηρίου. 
> » , Zz N » m^ N ^ > 32 ς v > 
οὐκ ἔτι εἰς αὐτὸ ἀνενεχθῆναι τὰ δῶρα, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἤδη àvevex- 
θέντων ἐκεῖ καὶ προσδεχθέντων εὔχονται καταπεμφθῆναι 
c ^ \ s \ N \ Foe " , 
ἡμῖν τὴν χάριν kai τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ Αγίου Πνεύματος : 
/ e^ .. 
* Búčoneda yap,” φησι, “ἐπὶ τῶν ἁγιασθέντων δώρων" - 
4 e , > n c / N > 3% e \ 
ἵνα ἁγιάσθη: οὐδαμῶς ' ἡγίασται γὰρ, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἁγιαστικὰ 
^ / ^ ^ 
ἡμῖν γένωνται, ἵνα ὁ ἁγιάσας αὐτὰ Θεὸς καὶ ἡμᾶς δι αὐτῶν 
ἁγιάσῃ. Φανερὸν τοίνυν. ὅτι τὸ ἀτιμάζειν τὴν ὑπὲρ τῶν 
δώρων εὐχὴν μετὰ τὸν τοῦ Κυρίου λόγον οὐδὲ τῆς τῶν 
Λατίνων ἐκκλησίας ἐστὶν ἁπλῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐνίων ὀλίγων καὶ 
, A \ \ » > ^ , , % > > ἈΝ 
VEWTEPWV, οἵ καὶ τὰ ἄλλα αὐτὴν ἐλυμήναντο" εἰς οὐδὲν 
ἕτερον εὐκαιροῦντες, ἢ λέγειν τι καὶ ἀκούειν καινότερον. 
Καὶ ταῦτα μὲν περὶ τῆς εὐχῆς. 
Ῥ. 6. cl., 425, 428, 429, 432, 433, 436, 437. 


306 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Ibid., ch. xxxii. Περὶ τῆς θυσίας αὐτῆς, καὶ τί ἐστι τὸ δεχόμενον τὴν 
θυσίαν. 
ε s A ^ ε ^ \ » 
...'H θυσία οὔτε πρὸ τοῦ ἁγιασθῆναι τὸν ἄρτον. 
» N N € ^ ^ > , 1 > ^ ^ € 
οὔτε μετὰ τὸ ἁγιασθῆναι τελεῖται, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ ἁγια- 
σθῆναι. P. G. cl., 440. 


Ibid., ch. xxxi. 
s , [4 \ , \ e A ^ , , Ἂς 
Τίνος χάριν ἱερεὺς εἰς τὸν ἁγιασμὸν τῶν δώρων, οὐ τὸν 
[4 ^ 
Tiov, ἀλλὰ τὸν Πατέρα καλεῖ: 
᾿Αλλὰ τίνος χάριν οὐ τὸν Tiov ἐπὶ τὸ ἁγιάσαι τὰ δῶρα 
t ^ e » 
ὁ ἱερεὺς καλεῖ, ἱερέα ὄντα καὶ ἁγιάζοντα, καθάπερ εἴρηται, 
> e e \ ς , 
ἀλλὰ τὸν Πατέρα: Ἵνα μάθῃς ὅτι τὸ ἁγιάζειν ὁ Σωτήρ. 
οὐχ ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἔχει, AAN ὡς Θεός" καὶ διὰ τὴν δύναμιν 
τὴν θείαν ἣν κοινὴν κέκτηται μετὰ τοῦ Ilarpos. 
^ e Ὄπ ^ 
Τοῦτο καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ Κύριος δηλῶσαι βουλόμενος, ὅτε 
> [4 N , > \ > \ » \ en \ 
ἐτέλει TO μυστήριον, εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν ἔβλεπε, καὶ τῷ Πατρὶ 
> N Já ^ 3 ^ 
ἀνεδείκνυε τὸν ἄρτον. Διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἔνια τῶν θαυμάτων 
e ^ , ^ ἊΝ ^ 
οὕτω φαίνεται ποιῶν, ἐν σχήματι τῆς πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν εὐχῆς. 
e s e > , > , , \ A £^ 9 
ἵνα δείξῃ ὡς οὐ φύσεως ἀνθρωπίνης ἐστὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα, καθ 
ἣν μητέρα ἔσχεν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἀλλὰ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ θειότητος. 
καθ ἣν τὸν Θεὸν ἔσχε llarépa. P. G. cl., 437. 


Symeon, Archbishop of Thessalonica. 71429 a.p. 

Ἑρμηνεία περί τε τοῦ θείου vaod . . . οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ THs θείας 
μυσταγωγίας κ.τ.λ. 

δ 86.... Εἶτα τὸ μέγιστον πάντων τῶν ἔργων τοῦ Θεοῦ 
ἀνυμνήσας ὁ ἱεράρχης τὴν τοῦ μονογενοῦς ἐνανθρώπησιν. 
καὶ τὸ μέγιστον πάλιν ἔργον τῆς οἰκονομίας αὐτὸῦ τὸν 
ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν θάνατον εἰς τὴν ἀνάμνησιν τῶν μυστηρίων 
χωρεῖ τε τοὺς ἱεροὺς ἀνακράζει λόγους, οὓς εἶπεν αὐτὸς 
tá ^ & S , e ες , s ^ / » S a £g 
ἱερουργῶν ὁ Σωτήρ" “Λάβετε, φάγετε, τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά 
nov“ καὶ “Tiere ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες, τοῦτο ἐστι τὸ αἷμα 

4) N x , ^ M e A , > , 
µου: καὶ τὸ ἐφεξῆς. "ἔπειτα ὑπὲρ πάντων εὐχαριστή- 
cas, καὶ ὑπὲρ πάντων τὰ δῶρα προσάγων, τὴν θεῖαν ἐπι- 

^ M ^ , Lol 

καλεῖται eis ἑαυτὸν καὶ eis τὰ προκείµενα δῶρα χάριν τοῦ 

Πνεύματος ' δὲ ἧς καὶ ταῦτα τετελεκὼς σφραγῖδι σταυροῦ 
ἣ 


APPENDIX 307 


καὶ ἐπικλήσει τοῦ Πνεύματος. τὸν ζῶντα εὐθὺς βλέπει 
προκείμενον ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ τοῦτον αὐτὸν ἀληθῶς ὄντα τὸν 
ἄρτον καὶ τὸ ποτήριον. Αὐτοῦ γὰρ αὐτό, ὁ ἄρτος τὸ σῶμα * 
καὶ τούτου αὐτό, τὸ ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ αἷμα. : 

P. 6. clv., 732, 733. 


$88. ᾽Απάντησις κατὰ τῶν βλασφήμως λεγόντων, πῶς τῇ εὐχῇ 
πιστεύομεν τελειοῦσθαι τὰ θεῖα δῶρα. 


'AAX ἐνταῦθα τῶν μὴ ὀρθῶς φρονούντων τινές. ἐν τῇ 
ἐπικλήσει τοῦ Πνεύματος καὶ τῇ τελειώσει τῶν δώρων οἷον 
διαποροῦντες, μᾶλλον δὲ ἀνθιστάμενοι τοῖς παραδεδομένοις 
ὑπό τε τοῦ Σωτῆρος καὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων αὐτοῦ, ἔτι τε 

\ ^ , , , , ^ 
καὶ τῶν διαδόχων τούτων θεοφόρων πατέρων, φιλονεικοῦσι, 
λέγοντες, πῶς οὐκ ἀρκούμεθα τοῖς Ἰνυριακοῖς μόνοις ῥήμασιν 
ERN EN ^ , ^ / , , \ ^ > ^ ^ 
ἐπὶ τῇ τελειώσει τῶν θείων δώρων, ἀλλὰ τῇ εὐχῇ θαρροῦμεν 
ἡμῶν; Οὗτοι οὖν τήν τε ἐπίκλησιν ἀθετοῦσι τολμηρῶς καὶ 
βλασφήμως τοῦ θείου Πνεύματος. καὶ τὴν αὐτοῦ ἀπαρνοῦν- 
ται (φεῦ 1) δύναμίν τε καὶ ἐνέργειαν, ἣν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις 

FERN SA \ NS Xr ὃ n \ 28 / ὃ > 
αὐτὸς ὁ Σωτὴρ καὶ ἐπηγγείλατο δοῦναι, καὶ ἐδωρήσατο. δι 
NS καὶ ἱερουργοὶ οὗτοι ποιμένες κεχειροτόνηνται, ἐπελθόντος 
αὐτοῖς τοῦ Παναγίου Τ]νεύματος, καὶ ταῖς πυρίναις γλώσ- 
σαις τὴν αὐτοῦ ἐνθεμένου ἐν αὐτοῖς δύναμιν, δι ἧς καὶ τὴν 
ἱερουργίαν, καὶ τὰς χειροτονίας διὰ τῆς ἐπιθέσεως τῶν 

^ ἣν \ ΞΡ IN (/ , / \ \ 
χειρῶν, καὶ τὰ ἰάματα καὶ θαυμάσια ἐξετέλουν. Kai yap 
οὐ τὸ ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν “ Ποίησον τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον τίμιον 
^ ^ ^ m \ \ / \ ΄ » 
σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ cov," καὶ τὰ λοιπά, τὸ δύνασθαι ἔχει 

, > , / > AJ N X ^ , x e , 
µόνον καθ᾽ αὐτό: ἀλλὰ τὸ μετὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος τὸν ἱερέα 
εἰπεῖν. τουτέστι μετὰ τοῦ χαρίσματος, μετὰ τῆς δυνάμεως 

\ ^ c , \ ^ > , S > \ 
δηλαδὴ τῆς ἱεροσύνης. Καὶ δῆλον ἐκ τούτου" εἰ γὰρ 
μυριάκις εἴποιεν τὰς Δεσποτικὰς φωνὰς καὶ πᾶσαν θεῖαν 
315 » Ξ ^ , NEE / y , 
ἐπίκλησιν, εἴτε βασιλεῖς πάντες ἢ ἀσκηταί, εἴτε πάντες 

^ e , ^ 
εὐλαβεῖς. μὴ ἱερωσύνην ἔχοντες. εἴτε ἅπαντες ὁμοῦ οἱ ἐν 
er Le: ^ s 3 \ / » ^ d / , 
ὅλῃ τῇ γῇ πιστοί, οὐδὲν πλέον ἔσται, μὴ ἱερέως παρόντος. 
^ e 
καὶ οὐδαμῶς ἱερουργημένα ἔσται τὰ Tap ἐκείνων προτε- 
θέντα, οὐδὲ σῶμα καὶ αἷμα Χριστοῦ" ὥστε οὐκ ἄνθρωπος. 


308 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


^ e ^ 

ἀλλὰ Θεός ἐστιν 0 διὰ τοῦ ἱερέως ἐνεργῶν, ἐπικαλουμένου 
τὴν χάριν τοῦ Πνεύματος, Kai ὅπερ ἂν εἴπῃ ὁ ἱερεύς, ἐνερ- 

, 3 ^ ^ e , , e N ^ 3. 
γόν ἐστι τῇ τῆς ἱερωσύνης δυνάμει. "Αυτη δὲ Θεοῦ ἐστι 
δύναμις. ἣν οὐ πᾶς κέκτηται πιστός, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ τὴν χειροτονίαν 
τοῦ ἱερέως μόνος δεξάμενος, καὶ πᾶσα εὐχὴ αὐτοῦ τελειο- 
ποιὸς θεία χάριτι. Καὶ ὁ μὴ τοῦτο πιστεύων οὐδὲ δεχό- 

Po pene Mu X 
, » y , 
μενος οὔτε βάπτισμα ἄρα, οὔτε μύρων τελετήν, οὔτε XELPO- 
τονίαν ἱερατικών τάξεων, οὔτε λύσιν ἐγκλημάτων, οὔτε μὴν 
^ [4 

σχήματος μοναχοῦ ἱερὰν εὐχὴν παραδέχεται, καὶ ἀπίστου 
οὗτος ἐγγύς, καὶ ἑαυτὸν τῆς μοίρας ἐξάγει τῶν Χριστιανῶν. 
IIdvra γὰρ ταῦτα δι εὐχῶν τελεῖται τῶν ἱερατικῶν. Ὥσπερ 
οὖν βαπτίζοντες καθὰ παρελάβομεν, εἰς ὄνομα βαπτίζομεν 
Πατρὸς καὶ Tiov καὶ Aťov Πνεύματος, 77) ἐπικλήσει τῆς 
Τριάδος τὸν βαπτιζόμενον τελειοῦντες, καίτοι γε οὐδὲ ταύτῃ 
τῇ ἐπικλήσει μόνῃ ἀρκούμεθα, ἣν παρέδωκεν ὁ Σωτήρ. 
> Ἂν , \ > ^ \ > / NX 
ἀλλὰ πρότερον μὲν καὶ σφραγῖδι, καὶ ἐμφυσήματι, kai 
ἀποταγαῖς, καὶ συνταγαῖς καὶ εὐχαῖς. καὶ χρίσει ἐλαίου 
c / ^ \ , , NS, , "^ 
ἁγιαζομένου σφραγῖδι, καὶ ἐμφυσήματι, καὶ ἐπικλήσει τῆς 
€ / / N , ve \ b 
ἁγίας Τριάδος, τὸν βαπτιζόµενον προκαθαίροµεν, καὶ τὸ 
e “Ὁ / ^ N 1 , , 
ὕδωρ τοῦ βαπτίσματος σφραγῖδι καὶ ἐπικλήσει Πνεύματος 
SA / 9 (ζ \ x , δὲ \ c \ e / 

γίου καθαγιάζοµεν, καὶ τὸ μύρον δὲ τὸ ἱερὸν ὁμοίως 
εὐχαῖς τελειοποιοῦμεν ἀρχιερατικαῖς, καὶ σφραγῖδι τοῦ 
σταυροῦ, καὶ μετὰ τὸ βάπτισμα τὸν βαπτισθέντα καὶ 
χρισθέντα τῷ μύρῳ εὐχαῖς τελειοῦμεν ἱεραῖς, καὶ τοῖς 
Θεοφανίοις ἁγιαζόμενα ὕδατα εὐχαῖς ἁγιάζομεν, καὶ ἔτι τὰ 
καθ᾽ ἑκάστην ἁγιαζόμενα, τῶν ἱερέων τὴν ἰσχὺν κεκτημένων 
> ^ ^ / , e eu x ^ ^ 
ἀπὸ ToU βαπτισθέντος ἐν ὕδατι, ὅτε τὸ Πνεῦμα κατῆλθε, 
καὶ τὸν χειροτονηθέντα ἀρχιερέα ἢ ἱερέα δεχόμεθα ἀπὸ τών 
ἱερατικῶν εὐχῶν καὶ τῆς τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐπικλήσεως, ἅπερ 
πλουτοῦσι τὴν δύναμιν ἀπὸ τῆς εἴδει πυρίνων γλωσσῶν, ὡς 
, , > ^ » / , ,F ^ , 
εἰρήκαμεν, ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις ἐλθούσης του Παρακλήτου 
δωρεᾶς τε καὶ χάριτος. οὕτω καὶ τὸ γενέσθαι τὸν ἄρτον καὶ 
τὸ ποτήριον σώμα καὶ αἷμα Χριστοῦ, ἀπὸ TOV ἱερατικῶν 
πιστεύομεν σαφώς ἐνερεῖσθαι εὐχῶν, καὶ τελειοῦσθαι τῇ τοῦ 
σταυροῦ σφραγῖδι, καὶ τῇ ἐπικλήσει τοῦ A yťov Πνεύματος, 


APPENDIX 309 


τών Κυριακών φωνών, τὸ “Λάβετε, bayere,” καὶ ** Π ίετε ἐξ 
^ ^ ^ , 
αὐτοῦ πάντες. καί, “ Τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνη- 
civ," τοῖς ἀποστόλοις καὶ τοῖς τῆς χάριτος αὐτών διδόχοις 
ἅπαξ τοῦτο παρασχουσών, δύνασθαι διὰ τών εὐχῶν ἐνερ- 
γεῖν. Διὸ καὶ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ἐκδιηγούμενος, καὶ avup- 
νῶν τὰ τῆς οἰκονομίας ὁ ἱερεύς, πρῶτον μὲν τὰς τοῦ Χριστοῦ 
θείας ἀνακράζει φωνάς. καὶ ὅτι τοῦτο αὐτὸς παρέδωκε, καὶ 
ὅτι “Aa τοῦτο προσφέροµέν σοι ταῦτα ὑπὲρ ἁπάντων, 
\ \ > f^ | [4 \ ὃ , 9 r ^ \ ^ , 
κατὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ ἐντολήν, λοιπὸν δεόµεθά σου. σὺ τὸ Ilvevua 
, , > > / \ \ / ὃ -’ \ 
σου ἐξαπόστειλον eis ἐμέ τε καὶ τὰ προκείμενα δώρα. Kail 
^ ^ © ^ ^ Já 
ποίησον ταῦτα σώμα kal αἷμα αὐτοῦ, ὡς ἐκεῖνος ἔφη, µετα- 
βαλὼν τῷ ᾿Αγίῳ cov Ilveinarı.” Kai ἐν τῷ λέγειν, σφρα- 
γίζει Kal τρὶς σφραγίσας. αὐτὸ τὸ σώμα kal αἷμα πιστεύει 
5 c / 
εἶναι ὁ ἱερεὺς τὸν ἄρτον καὶ τὸ ποτήριον, ἐπεὶ καὶ αὐτός ἐστι 
\ c A ^ c 7 , ^ [:4 γε N \ kod 
Χριστὸς ὁ διὰ τοῦ ἱερέως ἐνεργῶν ἅμα τῷ Πατρὶ καὶ τῷ 
Πνεύματι, καὶ αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ προσφέρων καὶ προσφερόμενος, 
καὶ ἱερουργών καὶ ἱερουργούμενος, καὶ προσδεχόμενος, καὶ 
διαδιδόμενος, ὡς καὶ ἐν τῇ τῆς μεγάλης εἰσόδου τοῦτο λέγο- 
e ^ 72 ^ ΄ 
μεν ἱερωτάτῃ εὐχῆ. Καὶ ἵνα σαφέστερον τοῦτο παραδηλώ- 
, A / \ ^ € e , > ^ / 
σωμεν, οὐδὲ σφραγίζει τὰ δώρα ὁ ἱερεύς, ἐν τῷ λέγειν, 
/ ^ 
Λάβετε, φάγετε," καὶ “dete ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες, διηγού- 
\ [4 » [4 μι. N ἊΝ / \ 
μενος γὰρ ὡς ἔφημεν, ταύτας λέγει πρὸς τὸν Πατέρα τὰς 
φωνάς, ἐπεὶ καὶ μετὰ ταύτας ἀντίτυπα τὰ δώρα φησὶν ὁ 
μέγας Βασίλειος. ᾿Αλλὰ μετὰ τὸ προσαγαγεῖν τὰ δώρα. καὶ 
> ^ ές T N \ > ^ αν 99 N X / 9 \ , 
εἰπεῖν, “Ta σὰ ἐκ TOV σών. καὶ ἐπικαλέσασθαι τὴν χάριν 
τοῦ Πνεύματος. τότε γὰρ πιστεύει παρεῖναι ταύτην διὰ τῆς 
e ^ ^ ^ ^ 
ἱερατικῆς εὐχῆς, ἀναστὰς σφραγίζει τὰ θεῖα δώρα, καὶ 
, \ \ ^ ^ 
εἰρηκὼς καὶ * Ποίησον τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον τίμιον σώμα 
^ ^ 45 \ / ra \ X » / 
τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου") καὶ σφραγίσας, τρίτον δὲ kal ἀμφό- 
τερα σφραφίσας, καὶ ἀνειπών, “ Μεταβαλὼν τῷ Πνεύματί 
Nas \ > / Lad A , 
τὸ ᾽Αμὴν ἐπιλέγει, βεβαιῶν τὸ μυστήριον, 
καὶ θαρρούντως ὁμολογών, ὡς σώμα καὶ αἷμα τὰ προκείµενά 


ne 
σου τῷ Ayia,” 
t 


εἰσι τοῦ Χριστοῦ, τῇ αὐτοῦ δυνάμει kal τοῦ Πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ 
΄ ^ 

Πνεύματος, καὶ οὐδὲν ἀνθρώπινον ἐκεῖσε, ἀλλὰ πάντα θείᾳ 

r \ 

γίνεται χάριτι. Διὸ kal ὁ προσάγων κεχειροτονηµένος, καὶ 


310 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


^ , , > 8 \ ^ c , \ \ 
τὸ θυσιαστήριον ἐφ᾽ © τὰ δώρα, ἡγιασμένον, καὶ χωρὶς 
τούτων, τελεῖται οὐδέν. Θεμέλιος μὲν οὖν ἐστι τῆς ἱερουρ- 
s \ A / e » "E , > ^ , ^ 
γίας τὰ του Kupíov, ὡς ἔφημεν, ῥήματα ἐξ ἀρχῆς. ἐνεργεῖ 
δὲ διὰ τῶν τοῦ ἱερέως εὐχῶν. “Ὥστε οὐκ ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν ὁ 
^ » r e e 
ἐνεργών, καθὸ ἄνθρωπος ὁ ἱερεύς, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ Χριστὸς ἐν ‘Ayio 
^ e ^ e εἰ 
Πνεύματι, διὰ τῆς ἱερωσύνης τῶν ἱερέων. Καὶ ὥσπερ ἅπαξ 
» © / ες Β r c A 49 ^ > / > x ta 
ἔφη Θεός, “ Βλαστησάτω ἡ ví), kal ἐνεργόν ἐστι τὸ ῥῆμα 
καὶ ἀεὶ βλαστάνει ἡ γῆ. καὶ “ Γενηθήτω dos," καὶ ἀεὶ 
s \ aj eu ος T in ^ 99 > 7 6 , \ > \ 
φαίνει τὸ φώς, οὕτω, “ Τοῦτο moıeite,” εἰπών, “eis τὴν ἐμὴν 
ἀνάμνησιν," ἀεὶ ἐνεργεῖ διὰ τῶν ἱερέων αὐτοῦ τὸ ῥῆμα. Διὸ 
» "^ ^ ^ 
καὶ TO, ** Ποίησον τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον σῶμα Χριστοῦ," évep- 
N \ ^ c , , / \ ὃ X ^ ^ > / \ 
γὸν διὰ τῶν ἱερέων ἐστί, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο μᾶλλον ἀλήθεια καὶ 
οὐ τύπος. σῶμα καὶ αἷμα Χριστοῦ τὰ ἱερουργούμενά εἰσιν. 
A t ^ ^ 
ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν, ὡς προείρηται, ὁ διὰ τῶν ἱερέων ἐνεργῶν. 
Καὶ τοῦτο οὕτως αὐτὸς παρέδωκε γίνεσθαι, τὸ διὰ τῶν 
, ^ e ^ » \ \ » \ > \ 3. τὰ 
εὐχῶν ἱερουργεῖν. "ἔλαβε γὰρ τὸν ἄρτον, καὶ εἰς τὸν οὐρα- 
\ H / \ / \ ~ N > if 
νὸν ἀνέβλεφε, καθὰ γέγραπται, καὶ τῷ Πατρὶ εὐχαριστήσας. 
» » ^ ^ , ^ 
ἔκλασε καὶ ἔδωκε τοῖς μαθηταῖς, λέγων, ** Λάβετε, φάγετε." 
M ος 1 y 2 > EN $3 Ne N \ c / [4 X , \ 
καὶ (ere ἐξ αὐτοῦ. καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ ὁμοίως. ὥστε καὶ αὐτὸς 
αὐτὰ διὰ τῶν εὐχῶν ἱερούργησεν οὐ χρείαν ἔχων εὐχῶν. 
Θεὸς ὧν παντοδύναμος. ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τούτου δεικνύς, ὅτι µία 
δύναμις τῆς Τριάδος: καὶ ἐν τῷ αὐτὸν αὐτουργεῖν. καὶ τὸν 
Πατέρα συνευδοκούντα ἔχει. καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ “A γιον συνερ- 
γόν, καθὰ καὶ ἐν τῇ αὐτοῦ θείᾳ σαρκώσει γέγονεν. "Avrôs 
\ \ 5 , € NX / > \ N c 
μὲν γὰρ ἣν μόνος ὁ Μονογενὴς σαρκωθείς, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ 
Πατὴρ εὐδόκησε, καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα δὲ τῇ σαρκώσει συνήργη- 
σεν, ὡς καὶ ἡ πρὸς τὴν παρθένον διδάσκει τοῦ ἀρχαγγέλου 
/ 1 \ \ / € ^ (ὃ δύ AUS » \ 
φωνή. ἐπεὶ καὶ µία ἡ τῆς Τριάδος δύναμις καὶ ἐνέργεια, καὶ 
, Ν e e e\ \ , s > ^ ^ N > , 
οὐδὲν ὅπερ ὁ Tios σαρκωθεὶς ἐκτετέλεκεν. eis ὃ μὴ kal εὐδό- 
€ , A \ ^ ve N , 
κησεν ὁ Πατήρ, ἢ τὸ [Πνεῦμα τὸ "Αγιον μὴ συνήργησεν. 
^ € ^ ^ δ ^ 
Οὐκοῦν ὁ τὰς ἱερατικὰς εὐχὰς ἀθετῶν ἐπὶ τῇ τελειώσει τῶν 
/ » Q5 » > \ ^ : e ^ e ^ ^ 
μυστηρίων οὐδ᾽ ἄλλην ἐπὶ τῶν ἱερῶν ἁπασῶν τελετῶν 
\ - 
τελεστικὴν εὐχὴν δέχεται, καὶ οὐ Χριστιανὸς οὗτος, ἐπεὶ 
οὔτε βάπτισμα, ὡς προειρήκαμεν, οὔτε χρίσμα, οὔτε µετᾶ- 
ám) ” e » 0^ lá ^ » A s 
νοιαν, οὔτ᾽ ἔλαιον ἅγιον, οὔθ᾽ ἁμαρτιῶν ἄφεσιν, ἢ θείαν 


APPENDIX 311 


e ΄ A \ ^ \ [4 A / 
ἱερωσύνην, ἢ μοναδικὸν σχῆμα, ἢ ναὸν ἅγιον, ἢ τίμιον 
γάμον, ἤ τινα ὅλως ἁγιασμὸν παραδέχεται. Ταῦτα γὰρ 
πάντα διὰ τῶν ἱερατικῶν εὐχῶν ἐνεργεῖται. Ἢ τοίνυν 
/ 3557 , nie ER / 313 / 
μηδόλως εὐχὴν ἐν TH lepoupyia ἢ προλεγέτω ἢ ἐπιλεγέτω, 
\ ὃ \ ^ δὲ \ / 2 / θ ^ II £ 
καὶ διὰ τοῦτο μηδὲ τὴν χάριν ἐπικαλείσθω τοῦ Πνεύματος, 
ὡς ἂν μηδὲ κοινωνίαν ἔχη Χριστοῦ, ὁμοίως τε μήτ᾽ ἐν τῷ 
fi ^ » ^ S es \ / 
βαπτίσματι ἣ ταῖς ἄλλαις τελεταῖς ἐπικαλείσθω τὴν χαριν 
^ , [r4 ^ » ^ , / , 
τοῦ Πνεύματος, ἵνα μηδαμῶς ἔχη τῆς ᾿Βκκλησίας µυστή- 
. 9» ο » / A 7 x / 9 
pıov, μηδ᾽ ὅλως εἴη Χριστιανός, ἢ Χριστιανὸς λέγων εἶναι, 
καὶ δεχόμενος τὰς τῶν ἱερέων εὐχάς, καὶ τὰς τελεστικὰς 
΄ \ / \ \ , » AT 5 
ταύτας φωνὰς δεχέσθω. πρὸς τὸν Πατέρα τε οὔσας καὶ ἐν 
τῇ ἐπικλήσει γινομένας τοῦ θείου Πνεύματος. ὡς παραδέ- 
δωκεν ὁ Σωτὴρ πρὸς τὸν Πατέρα εὐχαριστήσας. ὡς εἴρηται. 
ἐν τῷ τὰ μυστήρια ἐνεργεῖν. Ὃ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι ποιοῦντες 
ἐδείκνυντο, εὐχαριστοῦντες ἅμα καὶ κλῶντες τὸν ἄρτον, καὶ 
es / , M A / 
oí πατέρες παραδεδώκασι Βασίλειος καὶ Χρυσόστομος. 
Οἱ ἀνθιστάμενοι δὲ καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς σφῶν λειτουργίας ἐξελεγ- 
χέσθωσαν. Kiyovtat γὰρ καὶ αὐτοί, τὰ προκείμενα σῶμα 
[4 \ © n Σ ^ \ , ^ N ^ 
γενέσθαι καὶ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ εὐλογοῦσι τὰ δώρα. 
καὶ ἐμφυσώσι παρὰ τὴν θείαν παράδοσιν, οὐκ ἀρκούμενοι 
ταῖς τοῦ Κυρίου µόνον φωναῖς. ᾿Αλλ᾽ οὗτοι μὲν πάντα 
καινοτοµείτωσαν. Ἡμεῖς δὲ τηροῦντες τὰς παραδόσεις ἃς 
r € c S A δι © ^ \ ^ , L 
παρελάβομεν, ὡς ὁ Σωτὴρ δι ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων 
παρέδωκε καὶ πατέρων, τά τε μυστήρια τῆς φρικτῆς ἐκ- 
τελῶμεν κοινωνίας, τῇ ἐπικλήσει τοῦ θείου ΤΠ] νεύματος. - — 
ηλ ^ ^ nr ^ Ὁ“ 
διά τε τῶν τοῦ Κυρίου ῥημάτων, καὶ τῶν ἱερατικῶν εὐχῶν, 
καὶ πάσας τὰς θείας τελετάς —, τῇ προσευχῇ τοῦ ἱερέως ἐν 
θείᾳ ἐπικλήσει, καὶ τῇ τοῦ σταυροῦ σφραγῖδι. τὴν τελείωσιν 
πιστεύωμεν δέχεσθαι κατὰ τὴν θείαν παράδοσιν. ᾿Αλλὰ 
τὸ περὶ τούτου μὲν ἀρκείτω. P. 6. elv.. 733, 736, 737, 740. 


Answer of the Four Prelates, Trebizond, Mitylene, 
Nicea, and Kieff, 8 June, 1439 
Περὶ δὲ τῆς θείας ἱερουργίας ἐζητήθη πρὸς τῶν Λατίνων: 
πώς τῶν τοῦ Χριστοῦ ῥημάτων λαληθέντων, τοῦ. “ Λάβετε, 


912 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


φάγετε, τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι τὸ σῶμά µου, τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν κλώ- 
μενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιών *" καὶ τοῦ, * Πίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ 
πάντες, τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι τὸ αἷμά µου τὸ τῆς καινῆς καὶ 
αἰωνίου διαθήκης, μυστήριον πίστεως, τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ 
πολλών ἐκχυνόμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν *" καὶ τῶν ἁγίων 
δώρων διὰ τούτων τῶν ῥημάτων τελειωθέντων, ὑμεῖς μετὰ 
ταῦτα ποιεῖτε εὐχήν, καὶ λέγετε * Kai ποίησον τὸν μὲν 
ἄρτον τοῦτον, τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου" τὸ δὲ ἐν TO: 
ποτηρίῳ τούτῳ, τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, μεταβαλὼν 


" ?EAUON καὶ τοῦτο οὕτως " 


τῷ Ilvevuari σου τῷ ᾿Αγίῳ. 
ἡμεῖς εἴπομεν, ὅτι ὁμολογοῦμεν διὰ τῶν ῥημάτων τούτων 
τελειοῦσθαι τὸν θεῖον ἄρτον, καὶ γίνεσθαι σῶμα Χριστοῦ" 
ἀλλ᾽ ὕστερον, καθὼς καὶ αὐτοὶ λέγετε" ** KeXevoov προ- 
^ ^N "^ > \ N lá / > F > κ 
σενεχθῆναι τὰ δῶρα ταῦτα διὰ χειρὸς ἁγίου ἀγγέλου εἰς τὸ 
ὑπερουράνιόν σου θυσιαστήριον, οὕτω καὶ ἡμεῖς εὐχόμεθα, 
λέγοντες - “ Κατελθεῖν τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ "Αγιον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς. kal. 
ποίησον ἐν ἡμῖν τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον, τίμιον σώμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ 
σου. καὶ τὸ ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ τούτῳ. τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ Χριστου 
\ A SM ^ ΄ , ^ ne , 
cov, kal μεταβαλεῖν avrà τῷ Πνεύματι αὐτοῦ τῷ ‘Ayia, 
ὥστε γενέσθαι τοῖς μεταλαμβάνουσιν εἰς νίψιν ψυχῆς, εἰς 
ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν ' μὴ γένωνται eis κρῖμα ἢ eis κατάκριμα. 
ἡμῶν." Mansi, XXXI A, cols. 1004, 1005. 


Reply made on 10 June, 1439 
Τὸ τών μυστηρίων, ὁμολογοῦμεν ὅτι τελειοῦνται διὰ τῶν 
Κυριακών φωνών, εἰ καὶ ὕστερον ἡμεῖς ἐπικαλούμεθα * 
Γινέσθω σῶμα καὶ αἷμα Χριστοῦ. 
Mansi, XXXI A, cols. 1012. 


The Decree of Union, 5 July, 1439 (so far as concerns 
the Eucharist) 

"Er. ἐν ἀζύμῳ ἢ ἐν ἐνζύμω ἄρτῳ σιτίνῳ τὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ 
σῶμα τελεῖσθαι ἀληθώς, τούς τε ἱερεῖς ἐν θατέρῳ αὐτὸ τὸ 
σῶμα ToU Kupíov ὀφείλειν τελεῖν, ἕκαστον δηλονότι κατὰ. 
τὴν τῆς ἰδίας ἐκκλησίας, εἴτε δυτικῆς, εἴτε ἀνατολικῆς. 
συνήθειαν. Mansi, XXXI A, col. 1029. 


APPENDIX 313 


Query of the Latins after the Subscription of the Decree 
of Union 

Μετὰ ταῦτα ζητοῦσιν οἱ Λατῖνοι ab ἡμῶν ζητήματα 
ταῦτα. . . . Καὶ διὰ τί οὐκ ἀρκεῖσθε, φησίν, εἰς τὰ Κυ- 
ριακὰ λόγια τό, “ Λάβετε, φάγετε" " ἀλλὰ λέγετε μετὰ 
ταῦτα" “ Καὶ ποίησον τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον τίμιον σῶμα 
τοῦ Χριστοῦ cov," kai “MeraßaAwv αὐτὰ τῷ ΠΙνεύματί 
σου τῷ ᾿Αγίῳ, ᾿Α μήν, ᾽Αμήν, Αμήν. 
Mansi, ΧΧΧΙ A, cols. 1040, 1041. 


Isidore of Kieff at the Council of Florence, 20 June, 1439 - 


Si putarem aliguam contrarietatem inter ea, guae dicta 
sunt per magistrum, facerem longum sermonem. Nam 
necesse est in contradictionibus aut confirmare aut con- 
futare. Sed guoniam puto, [nos] adjutorio Dei esse con- 
cordes, per tria, guae dicam, breviter me expedio. 

Et primo dico ex tempore. Hoc missale, guo utimur, 
est traditum a Basilio et beato Chrysostomo, utebamur 
autem ante tempus schismatis, nec aligua facta est 
mutatio. Tamen occidentalis ecelesia nunquam de hoc 
verbum fecit: videlicet cum fuerimus concordes et ad 
eundem finem tendentes, secundum rem dicimus idem. 
Et dico: guod eredimus, id quod confieit mysterium, esse 
sermonem Domini, et credimus, Dominicam vocem esse 
effectricem divinorum munerum; et illa vox semper 
replicatur a sacerdote, et suscipit sacerdos, quod vox illa 
replicata aptetur et sit eadem vox cum voce Domini. Et 
ut ita aptetur, invocatur Spiritus Sanctus et supplicat 
sacerdos, ut per virtutem Spiritus Sancti concedatur 
gratia, ut vox repetita efficiatur ita effectiva, ut verbum 
Dei fuit. Et ita eredimus, consummativam fieri per illam 
orationem sacerdotis. Et probo, quod Dominicae voces 
habent operationem, ut semina, quia sine semine non 
potest effici fructus: ita in hae Dominica voce. Tamen 
ubi cadit semen, eget aliis instrumentis, ut sacerdotis, 


314 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


altaris et orationum. Unde credimus, per hoc [nos] vo- 
biseum esse concordes. > 

Quod autem addatur in definitione, dixit paternitas 
vestra, quod est necesse propter discordiam. Et dico, 
quod esset, si haec difficultas esset contraria; sed non est 
mota, ut fuerint disputationes, et ideo, cum non fuerit 
controversia, non debet deduci in dubium. 

De illa particula, in qua considerantur quatuor ad 
confectionem sacramenti, nos idem sentimus, quod vos: 
quod requiritur panis tritici et vinum de vite et sacerdos 
et principaliter per verba Dominica. Et quoniam in 
omnibus his sumus concordes, vos dicitis, quod debet poni 
propter declarationem rudium.  Rudes ita clare tenuerunt 
et ita tenebunt: unde non est necessarium hoc poni in 
diffinitione. Nam multae quaestiones sunt in baptis- 
mate; si de omnibus vellemus providere tempus non sufh- 
ceret. Cum autem dixerim ex me, supplico sanctissimum 
dominum nostrum et reverendos patres, ut non exigant 
aliam definitionem. Mansi, XXXI B, col. 1686-1687. 


Vera Historia Unionis non Verae inter Graecos et Latinos: 
sive Concilii Florentini Exactissima Narratio, Graece 
scripta per Sylvestrum Sguropulum. . . . Transtulit 
in Sermonem Latinum, Notasque ad Caleem Libri adjecit 
... Robertus Creyghton, S. Th. Doctor, et S. Burianae 
Decanus. Hagae-Comitis. 1660. 
$ X. "Ev ᾧ περὶ τῆς τελειώσεως TOv θείων μυστηρίων, 

κτλ. 

Chap. I. .- .. To δὲ περὶ τοῦ ἐνζύμῳ καὶ ἀζύμῳ ἵνα 
ἑκάστη δηλαδὴ τῶν ἀνατολικῶν καὶ δυτικών ἐκκλησιῶν 
κατὰ τὴν ἰδίαν συνήθειαν, ἡ μὲν ἱερουργῇ τὸ ἄζυμον, ἡ δὲ 
τὸ ἔνζυμον. . . 

Εἶτα ἐζήτησαν διορθώσαι ἡμᾶς καὶ ἀργῆσαι τὴν ἐπί τῇ 
τελειώσει τῆς ἀναιμάκτου θυσίας τριτὴν εὐλογίαν, καὶ ἐπί- 
κλησιν ToU Αγίου Πνεύματος τὴν γενομένην παρὰ τοῦ 
ἱερέως. "Ebackov γὰρ ὅτι αἱ Δεσποτικαὶ φωναὶ ἁγιάζουσι 


APPENDIX 315 


[4 Μ ^ 66 , , ^ ho WS) \ [0 , 493 
ταύτας ἤγουν τὸ “ Λάβετε φάγετε, τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά μου, 
M \ s , , ^ , 99 \ \ , , e 
καὶ τὸ ** Iliere ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες. Διὸ καὶ ἐμέμφοντο οἱ 
Λατῖνοι τοὺς ἡμετέρους. ὡς ἐσφαλμένως ποιοῦντας, μετὰ 
τὸ ἐκφωνῆσαι τὰ Δεσποτικὰ ταῦτα ῥήματα ἐπευχομένους, 
καὶ εὐλογοῦντας τὰ ἅγια. Kai ἐζήτουν ἵνα κωλύσωσι τοὺς 
ἡμετέρους ἱερεῖς τοῦ ἐπεύχεσθαι καὶ εὐλογεῖν μετὰ τὸ εἰπεῖν 
τὰ Δεσποτικὰ ταῦτα ῥήματα. Kal ἐγένετο ἔνστασις καὶ 
> M ^ , Ν > N ^ / , , 
ἀπὸ του Βασιλέως, καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν Λατίνων µεγάλη ἐν πολ- 
λαῖς συνελεύσεσιν. Ὅ τε Βασιλεὺς μετὰ καὶ ἄλλων πολλών 
λόγων ἔφη καὶ τοῦτο, Ori εἰ θέλετε πιστωθῆναι πώς καὶ ὁ 
μέγας Βασίλειος. καὶ ὁ μέγας Ἀρυσόστομος οὕτω παρέδω- 
καν ἁγιάζειν τὰ θεῖα δώρα. καὶ τελειοῦν, εὐρήσετε ἐν πάσαις 
ταῖς ἐν τῇ ἀνατολῇ ἐκκλησίαις τὰς γεγραμμένας λειτουρ- 
΄ r e ľa € \ ^ » 45 
yias πάσας οὕτω διαλαμβανούσας ὑπὲρ τὰς xf οὔσας. 
"Eon δὲ πρὸς τοῦτο 0 TovMavos, “ Δύναται ἡ ἁγία Βασιλεία 
σου μεθ᾽ ὅρκου διαβεβαιώσαι, ὅτι τὰ βιβλία ἅπερ ὁρίζεις. 
οὕτως ἐξεδόθησαν τὴν ἀρχὴν παρὰ τῶν ἁγίων ἐκείνων. 
καθὼς εὑρίσκοντο νῦν, καὶ οὐδ᾽ ὅλως μετεποιήθησαν ἐν τού- 
τοις χρόνοις: Εἰ δὲ τοῦτο οὐ γενήσετο, πῶς ἡμεῖς τοῖς 
βιβλίοις πιστεύσομεν ; ᾿" 
€ 5 \ » ^ , e ^ > Z , 
Ως οὖν καὶ εἰς τοῦτο παράτασις ἡμερῶν ἐγένετο. διεµηνύ- 
σατο ὁ πάπας καὶ ἐγένετο συνέλευσις τοῦ Βασιλέως καὶ 
en , \ / , ^ 5 / , / σι 
Ίμων εἰς τον πάπαν, μόνου Tov Edécov ἀπόντος. Καὶ 
λόγοι πολλοὶ περὶ τοῦ δὲ κεκίνηνται τοῦ ζητήματος: τών 
μὲν Λατίνων ἀγωνιζομένων παντὶ τρόπῳ συστῆσαι ἣν 
ἔχουσι δόξαν περὶ τούτου, καὶ καταστῆσαι καὶ τοὺς ἡμετέ 
ρους οὕτως ἱερουργεῖν, ToU ᾿Ῥωσίας δὲ καὶ τοῦ Νικαίας 
ἀντιλεγόντων μὲν ἐκ μέρους. κατά τι δὲ καὶ συμφωνούντων. 
Ἔφασκον γὰρ μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων καὶ τοῦτο: ““Ὅτι καθάπερ 
Ν ^ ^ ^ ^ 
τὸ θεῖον ἐκεῖνο πρόσταγμα ἅπαξ παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰρημένον. 
τό, "Βλαστησάτω ἡ γῆ βοτάνην χόρτου. σπεῖρον σπέρμα 
κατὰ γένος ᾿ ἐξ ἀρχῆς καὶ εἰς δεῦρο ἐνεργεῖ, καὶ ἕως τῆς συν- 
τελείας δὲ ἐνεργήσει" καὶ πεπείσμεθα μὲν ὡς τὸ θεῖον 
πρόσταγμά ἔστι τὸ ἐμποιοῦν τῇ γῇ δύναμιν ἀναφύειν καὶ 


316 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


^ dd ^ 
καρποφορεῖν, χρεία δὲ ὅμως καὶ ἐνεργείας γεωργικῆς, 
ὁρῶμεν γὰρ αὐτὴν πλεῖστα συνεργοῦσαν τῇ γῇ πρὸς καρπο- 
φοράν. Οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς ἱερᾶς ταύτης θυσίας φαμὲν ὅτι 
\ \ , ^ e T. BR N - r , , 
τὰ μὲν ἐκεῖνα ῥήματα, εἰσὶ τὰ ἁγιάζοντα ταύτην, συμβάλ- 
Ν NA > S A [4 > / A e , YA "m 
λοντο δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸ καὶ αἱ εὐχαί, καὶ αἱ ἐπικλήσεις τοῦ 
ἱερέως πρὸς τὴν τελείωσιν, ὥσπερ ἡ ἐπιμέλεια τοῦ γεωργοῦ 
\ \ M ^ m ο ^ , , vn» ee , 
πρὸς τὴν φορὰν τῆς γῆς." Ταῦτα εἰπόντων ov οἱ ἡμετέροι 
πάντες ἠρκέσθησαν, πρὸς τὸν σκοπὸν ἀφορώντες τών ἐν 
^ / fe [4 » ^ ^ 
ταῖς θείαις λειτουργίαις γεγραμμένων, οὔτε πολλῷ μᾶλλον 
^ > ^ 
οἱ Λατῖνοι πρὸς τὴν ἰδίαν ἀφορῶντες πρόληψιν. Διὸ καὶ 
οὐ συνεφώνησαν. Pp. 277, 278-279. 
Ibid. 
$ X., Chap. VIII. . . . Ὥρισεν ὁ Βασιλεύς, “Ὅτι ὁ 
Νικαίας ἐστὶν ἀνατεθειμένος, ἵνα εἴπῃ λόγους τινὰς πρὸς 
τὸν πάπαν οὓς ἀκούσεσθε καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐκεῖσε." 
> /2 5 ^ » , \ ^ / ς 
Απήλθομεν οὖν μὴ εἰδότος τινὸς τῶν σταλέντων τι ὁ 
^ e N 
Νικαίας ἐρεῖ. Kai εὕρομεν τὸν πάπαν καθήμενον μετὰ 
^ ^ Ν 
τῶν καρδηναλίων, καὶ πάσης τῆς περὶ αὐτὸν συνόδου" ἐκα- 
/ Ν \ c ^ N μα. / [ol 7 , 
θίσαµεν δὲ καὶ ἡμεῖς. Kal ἀρξαμένου τοῦ Νικαίας λέγειν 
εὐθὺς εἶπεν ὁ Τουλιανός, “ Πρωτονοτάριε oxpiBa.” ᾿Ἐκάθι- 
ľa t , \ , 
σεν οὖν ὁ πρωτονοτάριος, καὶ ἕτεροι γραμματικοί, καὶ ἔγρα- 
, ^ e 5 e s a \ fr \ 
φον ἐπιμελῶς ὅσα εἶπεν ὁ Νικαίας. Ὃς καὶ βραχέα τινὰ 
\ ^ , ^ ^ 
προοιμιασάµενος EIS τὸ περὶ τῆς τελειώσεως, τῆς ἱερᾶς καὶ 
μυστικῆς θυσίας τὸν λόγον κατέληξε εἰπών, “Ὅπερ δοξάζει 
€ e Pa > A , / \ m^ , ^ / 
ἡ ἁγία ᾿Ῥωμαικὴ ἐκκλησία περὶ τῆς τελειώσεως τῶν θείων 
, ^ , \ e ^ e c ^ Ν 
δώρων τοῦτο δοξάζομεν καὶ ἡμεῖς * ὅτι αἱ θεῖαι καὶ Δεσπο- 
\ \ IHN e ξ / \ ^ \ ^ 
τικαὶ φωναὶ εἰσὶν αἱ ἁγιάζουσαι καὶ τελειοῦσαι τὰ θεῖα 
^ w , 6 / U ^ τα N m^ , 9 
δῶρα, ἤγουν τό, * Aaßere φάγετε, τοῦτο ἐστι τὸ σῶμά μου" 
^ ^ \ e 
καὶ TO, * Πίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες, τοῦτο ἐστι τὸ αἷμα pov.’ 
Καὶ συμφωνοῦμεν καὶ κατὰ τοῦτο ὑμῖν: οὐ γὰρ δοξάζομεν 
ἄλλο παρὸ ὑμεῖς λέγετε καὶ δοξάζετε. Συμβάλλεσθαι δὲ 
/ ^ 
φάμεν καὶ τὸν ἱερέα πρὸς ταῦτα ὡς τὸν γεωργὸν πρὸς τὴν 
> / ^ , ^ ^ / Ν \ ^ , Ν 
ἐπιμέλειαν τῶν ἐκ τῆς γῆς φυομένων. Τὸ δὲ πᾶν εἰς τὰς 
Δεσποτικὰς ἐκείνας φωνὰς ἀνάγομεν, καὶ ἐσμὲν καὶ εἰς 
τοῦτο σύμφωνοι ὑμῖν. Pp. 208 


APPENDIX 317 


Mark of Ephesus. 71451 a.p. 


" s , ^ ^ ^ ^ t η t N 
Οτι οὐ µόνον ἀπὸ τῆς φωνῆς τῶν Δεσποτικῶν ῥημάτων ἁγιάζονται τὰ 
θεῖα δῶρα, ἀλλ ἐκ τῆς μετὰ ταῦτα εὐχῆς καὶ εὐλογίας τοῦ ἱερέως δυνάμει 
τοῦ Aylov Πνεύματος. 
Ἡμεῖς ἐκ τῶν ἱερῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ τῶν διαδεξαμένων 
, \ r ^ > s \ ^ ^ 
αὐτοὺς διδασκάλων τῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας, τὴν τῆς μυστικῆς 
£ » , , > \ , 
λειτουργίας ἔκθεσιν παρειληφότες, παρ᾽ οὐδενὶ τούτων 
εὕρομεν UT αὐτῶν τῶν δεσποτικῶν ῥημάτων καὶ μόνον 
ἁγιάζεσθαι καὶ τελειοῦσθαι τὸ τῆς εὐχαριστίας δώρον, καὶ 
πρὸς αὐτὸ τὸ Δεσποτικὸν σῶμα καὶ αἷμα μεταποιεῖσθαι " 
ἀλλὰ προλεγόμενα μὲν διηγηματικῶς τὰ ῥήματα παρὰ 
πᾶσι συμφώνως ἡμᾶς τε ἀναφέροντας τὰ πρὸς τὴν μνήμην 
τοῦ τότε πραχθέντος καὶ δύναμιν ὥσπερ ἐνιέντα τοῖς προ- 
κειμένοις εἰς τὴν μεταβολήν ' ἐπιγινομένην δὲ μετὰ ταῦτα 
m e ^ 
τὴν εὐχήν TE καὶ εὐλογίαν τοῦ ἱερέως, ἐνεργείᾳ μεταποιεῖν 
^ \ ^ ^ Ξ 
ἤδη τὰ δῶρα πρὸς αὐτὸ πρωτότυπον ἐκεῖνο σῶμα καὶ αἷμα 
\ , ^ x \ e , / > \ 
τὸ Δεσποτικόν. Ταῦτα δὲ καὶ αἱ ἐκθέσεις αὐταὶ µαρτυ- 
ροῦσι, σύμφωνοι παρ᾽ ἡμῖν εὑρισκόμεναι, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἐπὶ 
ταύταις ἀποδοθήσεται... .1 Οὕτω μὲν ἅπαντες οὗτοι 
, , ὃς \ \ £9 \ > 
συμφώνως προλέγουσι μὲν τὰ Δεσποτικὰ ῥήματα. καὶ δι 
αὐτών εἰς ἀνάμνησιν ἡμᾶς ἄγουσι τοῦ τότε πραχθέντος, καὶ 
τὴν ἁγιαστικὴν δύναμιν ἐνιᾶσι τελουμένοις - ἐπεύχονται 
ὕστερον καὶ τὴν τοῦ ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματος ἐπικαλοῦνται χάριν, 
ὥστε αὐτὴν ἐλθοῦσαν, τὰ εἰρημένα τότε τοῖς LUV ἐφαρμόσαι, 
καὶ τὰ προκείμενα τελειῶσαι. καὶ πρὸς τὸ Δεσποτικὸν σῶμα 
καὶ αἷμα μεταποιῆσαι " αὕτη γὰρ καὶ ἐν τῇ μήτρᾳ τῆς 
παρθένου τὴν θεοφόρον ἐκείνην συνεστήσατο σάρκα, κατὰ 
' » / \ , S id \ ^ > / A ες ^ 
τὸ εἰρημένον πρὸς αὐτὴν ὑπὸ TOU ἀγγέλου Πνεῦμα 
σ > 7 > N [4 \ , c s > / 
Άγιον ἐπελεύσεται ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ δύναμις Υψίστου ἐπισκιάᾶ- 
99 \ δρ Ne s / Ν \ , ^ 
σει cot.” Διὰ τοῦτο kal ὁ μέγας Βασίλειος, μετὰ τὸ εἰπεῖν 
τὰ Δεσποτικὰ ῥήματα διηγηµατικώς ὡς TAP αὐτοῦ εἰρη- 
1! The quotations from the Liturgies of S. James, S. Basil, S. 
Chrysostom, and from the Liturgy in the Eighth Book of the Apos- 


tolie Constitutions, are omitted here for the sake of brevity. See 
above, pp. 253, 273, 287, 289. 


318 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


^ , / ^ 
μένα ἐπὶ τοῦ ἁγίου σώματος καὶ αἵματος. ἀντίτυπα καλεῖ 
τὰ προκείμενα, δῆλον ὡς μήπω τετελεσμένα διὰ τῶν 
Ld , , y: > 31:97. ΄ AN \ > / g 
ῥημάτων ἐκείνων, ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι TÚTOV τινὰ kal εἰκόνα φέροντα. 
Καὶ οὕτως εὐθὺς ἐφεξῆς τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ "Αγιον ἐλθεῖν ἐπεύ- 
χεται. καὶ ἀναδεῖξαι τὸν μὲν ἄρτον αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον σῶμα, τὸ 
δὲ ποτήριον αὐτὸ τὸ τίμιον αἷμα. Καὶ τοῦτο γε λίαν 
εἰκότως * καθάπερ γὰρ ἐπὶ τῆς πρώτης ἐκείνης δημιουργίας 
» N e ^ \ = , X > > ^ A 
ἔλαβε μὲν ἡ γῆ τὴν TOV βλαστάνειν τὰ ἐξ αὐτῆς δύναμιν 
διὰ τοῦ θείου προστάγματος, καὶ τὸ πρόσταγμα ἐκεῖνο. 
καθά φησιν ὁ αὐτὸς διδάσκαλος, ἐναπομεῖναν τῇ γῆ. τὴν 
τοῦ βλαστάνειν αὐτῇ διηνεκῶς παρέχεται δύναμιν - χρεία 
δὲ ὅμως καὶ ἡμετέρας ἐπιμελείας. καὶ γεωργικῶν χειρῶν 
εἰς τὸ τελεσιουργεῖν τὰ φυόμενα - τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον καὶ ὁ 
λόγος οὗτος. ἅπαξ ῥηθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ Σωτῆρος. ὡς καὶ ὁ θεῖος 
φησι Χρυσόστομος. διὰ παντὸς ἐνεργεῖ " συνεργεῖ δὲ ὅμως 
καὶ ἡ τῆς θείας ἱερωσύνης δύναμις διὰ τῆς εὐχῆς καὶ τῆς 
εὐλογίας εἰς τὴν τῶν προκειμένων τελείωσιν ' αὕτη γὰρ καὶ 
\ ^ / “ A e ^ , ^ , 
τὸ τοῦ βαπτίσματος ὕδωρ ὃν ἁπλῶς ἐκ τοῦ φαινομένου 
/ ig s N > / ^ / ΄ 
πάσης ἁμαρτίας καθαρτικὸν ἀπεργάζεται, τοῦ θείου Ilvev- 
ματος ἀθεωρήτως συντρέχοντος * αὕτη καὶ τὸ χρίσμα τοῦ 
ľá \ \ e ^ , \ \ » , ^ , » 
μύρου καὶ τοὺς ἱερεῖς αὐτοὺς kal τάλλα πάντα τῆς Εκκλη- 
/ id ^ N ^ "^ / [4 
σίας μυστήρια τελεσιουργεῖ διὰ τῆς τοῦ Παναγίου Ilvev- 
, , / ^ e / , ^ ^ 
ματος χάριτος. Οὐ τοίνυν τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ εὐχῇ θαρροῦντες. 
οὐδὲ τῶν ῥημάτων ἐκείνων ἀδυναμίαν καταγινώσκοντες. 
ἐπευχόμεθα τοῖς προκειμένοις. καὶ οὕτως αὐτὰ τελειοῦσθαι 
πιστεύομεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ ῥήματα τὴν οἰκείαν σώζειν ὁμο- 
λογοῦμεν ἰσχύν, καὶ τὴν τῆς θείας ἱερωσύνης ἐπιδείκνυμεν 
\ Ὁ. \ ^ 
δύναμιν, τελειωτικὴν οὖσαν παντὸς μυστηρίου TY ἐπικλήσει 
^ > > ^ > CC € s , e N \ 
τοῦ δι αὐτῆς ἐνεργοῦντος ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματος * οὕτω γὰρ καὶ 
ὁ θεῖος Χρυσόστομος αὖθις ἐν τῷ Περὶ ἱερωσύνης τρίτῳ 
ρ E ; pt ερ "s τρίτῳ 
\ 3 ΄ T5 ο SCC" 
περὶ αὐτοῦ τούτου τοιάδε φησίν Eornkev . . . πεπυ- 
ρωμένου. 1 "AXX οὐδ᾽ ἀμφιβολίαν τινὰ καὶ ἀδηλίαν εὐ- 
^ , ^ ^ 
χοµένους ἡμᾶς ὑποπτεύειν χρεών, αὐτοῦ τοῦ θειουµένου καὶ 


! De Sacerdotio, 1Π., 4. See above, p. 261. 


APPENDIX 319 


/ / / ^ ^ 
µεταλαμβανομένου Δεσπότου κελεύσαντος τοῦτο ποιεῖν 
ἡμᾶς * “Τοῦτο yap,” φησί, “ ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνη- 
aw*” καὶ ἐπαγγειλαμένου δώσειν Πνεῦμα Άγιον τοῖς 
αἰτοῦσιν αὐτὸ ἅπασι. μήτι γε ἱερεῦσι, καὶ σφόδρα γε βου- 
λομένου τοῦτο ka ἑκάστην ἐπιτελεῖσθαι παρ᾽ ἡμῶν, ὡς 
διὰ πάντων ἑξῆς ἀναφαίνεται. Ἢ σύ γε τυχὸν ἐκ τούτου, 
καὶ τὸ βάπτισμα ὑποπτεύσειας. δι εὐχῶν ὁμοίως καὶ ἐπι- 
κλήσεων τελειούμενον, καὶ τὴν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἄφεσιν. εἰ 
, ^ , [4 , / \ ^ d ^ 
ἀληθῶς ἐδέξω. δισταγµόν τινα σχοίης διὰ τῆς ἱερατικῆς 

, , , ^ » , » c / , 
χάριτος ἐπιδιδομένην, καὶ τἄλλα πάνθ᾽ ὁμοίως ἐκκλησια- 
A , , , » , » ^ , 
στικὰ μυστήρια διαγράψειας.. AAN οὐκ ἔστι ταῦτα, οὐκ 
ἔστι - πιστὸς γὰρ ὁ ἐπαγγειλάμενος. μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν ἔσεσθαι τὰς 
ἡμέρας ἁπάσας, ἄχρι τῆς συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος. Ἡμεῖς 
μὲν οὖν ταῦτα παρὰ τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων καὶ ἐκείνους 
ἐκδεξαμένων παραλάβοντες. καὶ κατέχομεν ἀμεταποιήτως. 
\ \ , 3029 , ^ H / , u Na 
καὶ τὸν γιγνόμενον ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἀποδίδομεν λόγον" ὅτι δὲ ὁ 
^ / \ ^ s , > » , 
τοῦ Κυρίου περὶ τῶν μυστηρίων λόγος, ἐν εἴδει διηγήσεως 
λεγόμενος, πρὸς ἁγιασμὸν δώρων ἀρκεῖ, οὐδεὶς" οὔτε τῶν 
ἀποστόλων, οὔτε τῶν διδασκάλων εἰπὼν φαίνεται. ᾿Αλλ᾽ 
ὅτι μὲν ἅπαξ ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνου ῥηθῆναι, καθάπερ ὁ δημιουργικὸς 
λόγος ἀεὶ ἐνεργεῖ, τοῦτό φησιν ὁ τὴν γλῶτταν χρυσοῦς 
, , e ^ ^ [4 \ ^ (4 / , M ^ 
Ἰωάννης. Ὅτι δὲ νῦν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἱερέως λεγόμενος. διὰ τὸ 
ig > > ^ , ^ , , , » ^ 
ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ λέγεσθαι τοῦτο δύναται. οὐδαμόθεν ἔστι μαθεῖν - 
, \ 3 © , \ e % , , ^ er , A. € , 
ἐπεὶ οὐδ᾽ αὐτὸς ὁ δημιουργικὸς λόγος ἐνεργεῖ, ὅτι ἐφ᾽ ἑκάστῳ 
^ ΄ rel d , » y: / > » ὦ 1 \ 
τῶν γενομένων ὑπό τινος ἀνθρώπου λέγεται" ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἐστὶν 
ἅπαξ ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰρημένος. Kal μὴν οὐδ᾽ αὐτοὶ φήσου- 
σιν ἐνεργεῖν τὸν Δεσποτικὸν λόγον, ὑπὸ τοῦ τυχόντος ἁπλῶς 
λεγόμενος, οὐδ᾽ ἄνευ θυσιαστηρίου. Ei τοίνυν ἱερέως δεῖ 
"^ AN ^ 
καὶ θυσιαστηρίου. καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ὅσα πρὸς τοῦτο συντείνει. 
ὃ AJ / ^ \ , ^ ὃ / > fe \ ^ ὃ , Dy ας 
ιὰ τί μὴ καὶ εὐχῶν, δεήσεως. εὐλογίας. καὶ τῆς δι αὐτῆς 
> , ^ € / , e , m 
ἐπιφοιτήσεως τοῦ ᾽Αγίου Πνεύματος. ἥτις πάντα τελειοῖ 
, EXE ^ , mg 
τὰ µυστήρια: Πρὸς τούτους ὁ ἱερὸς Διονύσιος ἐπιμαρτυρή- 
^ ^ , ^ 
cov παρίτω τοῖς TAP ἡμῶν τελουμένοις - ἐν γὰρ τῇ θεωρίᾳ 
^ ^ c 
τοῦ τῆς συνάξεως μυστηρίου, “ Τὰς ἱεράς, φησί, θεουργίας 


320 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ὁ ἱεράρχης ὑμνήσας, ἐπὶ τὴν ἱερουργίαν ἔρχεται ' καὶ πρό- 

τερον μὲν ὑπὲρ ταύτης ἀπολογεῖται καὶ ἀναβοᾷ * Σὺ εἶπας, 
^ ^ 14 5 ^ 

Τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν *^ εἶτα τῆς θεομιμή- 

του ταύτης ἱερουργίας ἄξιος αἰτεῖ γενέσθαι, καὶ τῇ πρὸς 

Χριστὸν ἀφομοιώσει τὰ θεῖα πανάγνως τελέσαι καὶ δια- 

^ c ^ ^ j 

δοῦναι, καὶ τοὺς μεθέξοντας ἱεροπρεπῶς μετασχεῖν. Eid’ 
“ c ^ \ , Ae S 9) » ^ € / 
οὕτως ἱερουργεῖ τὰ θειότατα, καὶ ὑπ᾽ ὄψιν ἄγει τὰ ὑμνημένα 
διὰ τῶν ἱερῶς προκείµενων" τὸν γὰρ ἐγκεκαλυμμένον καὶ 
, x ^ 
ἀδιαίρετον ἄρτον ἀνακαλύψας., eis πολλὰ διελών, kal TO 
ἑνιαῖον τοῦ ποτηρίου πᾶσι καταµερίσας, συμβολικῶς τὴν 
ἑνότητα πληθύνει καὶ διανέμει "" καὶ per ὀλίγα > “ Mera- 
e 
σχὼν δὲ καὶ μεταδοὺς ὁ ἱεράρχης, eis εὐχαριστίαν ἱερὰν 
καταλήγει." 

Ταῦτα συνορᾶν ἔξεστι τῷ βουλομένῳ παντί, τίσι ἐστὶ 
σύμφωνα, τοῖς Tap ἡμῶν τελουμένοις, ἢ τοῖς παρὰ Λατί- 
νων. Ἡμεῖς μὲν γὰρ ἀκολουθοῦντες τοῖς ἱεροῖς ἀποστόλοις 

\ , N A € > > ^ [4 , 
καὶ διδασκάλοις, κατὰ τὰς UT αὐτῶν παραδεδομένας ἐκ- 

, ^ e , e 

θέσεις. καὶ τούτω δὴ τῷ ἱεροφάντορι, τὰς ἱερὰς θεουργίας 
^ ^ , 
ὑμνοῦμεν. τουτέστιν, ὡς αὐτός φησι. τὴν δι ἡμᾶς ἐνανθρώ- 
πησιν τοῦ Θεοῦ, τὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν αὐτοῦ θάνατον, τὴν θεο- 
/ ^ s ^ / ς / \ \ 
γενεσίαν τῶν βαπτιζοµένων, τὴν θείαν υἱοθεσίαν, τὴν διὰ 
^ ^ ^ , ^ , 52)» Ὁ > \ ^ 
τῆς φυλακῆς τῶν ἐντολῶν θέωσιν" εἶθ᾽ οὕτως ἐπὶ τὴν 
ἱερουργίαν ἐρχόμενοι, πρότερον μὲν ὑπὲρ ταύτης ἀπολογού- 
μεθα, καὶ ἀναβοῶμεν αὐτὰ τὰ Δεσποτικὰ ῥήματα, ἃ τότε 
εἶπε: καὶ ἐπιλέγομεν, ὅτι αὐτὸς προσέταξε, “ Τοῦτο ποιεῖτε 
εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν +" εἶτα τῆς θεομιμήτου ταύτης 
ἱερουργίας ἄξιοι αἰτήσαντες γενέσθαι, καθὰ περιέχουσιν 
αἱ ἐκθέσεις, ἱερουργοῦμεν τὰ θειότατα διὰ τῆς εὐχῆς καὶ 
3 s A ^ ^ is , > , \ 
εὐλογίας καὶ τῆς τοῦ θείου Πνεύματος ἐπιφοιτήσεως * καὶ 
τὸν ἐγκεκαλυμμένον τέως καὶ ἀδιαίρετον ἄρτον ἀνακαλύ- 
ψαντες, εἰς πολλὰ διαιροῦμεν, καὶ τὸ ἑνιαῖον τοῦ ποτηρίου 

^ s c \ N / Ὁ \ [4 
πᾶσι καταµερίζοµεν. Ὃὧ δὲ παρὰ Λατίνοις ἱερεὺς μέμνηται 
μὲν καὶ αὐτὸς διηγηματικῶς τῶν Δεσποτικῶν ῥημάτων, ὅτι 
αὐτὸς προσέταξε, * Λάβετε, φάγετε," καὶ “ΤΠ ίετε πάντες, 


APPENDIX 321 


καί, "Τοῦτο ποιεῖτε eis τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν *" ἱερουργεῖ 
δὲ οὐδὲν μᾶλλον, ἀλλ᾽ οἴεται τὴν διήγησιν αὐτὴν τῶν 
\ \ € Ν e » ^ 
ῥημάτων πρὸς τὸν ἁγιασμὸν καὶ τὴν ἱερουργίαν ἀρκεῖν " 
9 \ » ” ^ 
εἶτα τὸν ἄζυμον ἄρτον ἐκεῖνον, οὐκ ἐγκεκαλυμμένον τέως, 
ἀλλ᾽ ὅθεν ἔτυχεν οὕτω λαβὼν καὶ ὑψώσας. µέρος μὲν ἄπορ- 
/ \ £x / , , Ν \ \ / 
ρήγνυσι, καὶ τῷ ποτηρίῳ ἐμβάλλει" τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν καθίησιν 
\ e , 
εἰς τὸ στόμα, καὶ τὸ ποτήριον ἐκπιὼν ὅλον ὁμοίως, ἀσπά- 
N ^ ^ 
ζεσθαι αὐτὸν προτρέπεται τοὺς συλλειτουργοῦντας αὐτῷ 
διακόνους, μηδενὶ μηδὲν µεταδούς, ὁ τὸ “ Λάβετε, φάγετε 
/ B ^ m ^ 
πάντες, καὶ “Iliere ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες," μεγαλαυχῶν. 
Ταῦτα οὐ πρόδηλον φέρει τὴν ἐναντίωσιν καὶ πρὸς τὰς 
παραδεδομένας ἐκθέσεις καὶ ἐξηγήσεις πρὸς τὰ Δεσποτικὰ 
SALA \ \ , N \ > s , nl; / 
ῥήματα, καὶ πρὸς αὐτὰς τὰς ἐκείνων φωνάς: Εἶτα τολµή- 
σουσιν οὕτως ἔχοντες ἐγκαλεῖν ἡμῖν καὶ περιεργάζεσθαι τὰ 
ἡμετέρα καὶ ἐφερμηνεύειν, οὕτως ἀκόλουθα τοῖς ἁγίοις ὄντα : 
᾿Αλλ᾽ ὁ Χρυσόστομός φησι τὸν Δεσποτικὸν λόγον ἅπαξ 
« / \ / » / , , e t 
ῥηθέντα τὴν θυσίαν ἀπηρτισμένην ἐργάζεσθαι ἅπαξ ῥη- 
/ \ > n c N ne ΄ / » 3 [x 
θέντα φησὶν οὐ νῦν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἱερέως λεγόμενον, ἀλλ ἅπαξ 
e A ^ 5) ^ € 9 / \ N \ Sig ZN ὃ s 
ὑπὸ τοῦ Σωτῆρος ῥηθέντα, τὴν τελειωτικὴν ἀεὶ δύναμιν 
ἐνιέναι τοῖς προκειµένοι», οὐκ ἤδη καὶ ἐνεργείᾳ τελειοῦν 
> / ^ \ c PET / ^ > / 
αὐτά: τοῦτο yap ἡ τοῦ ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματος ἐπιφοίτησις 
^ mE ^ 
ἐργάζεται διὰ τῆς τοῦ ἱερέως [sc. ἐπικλήσεως ]. καὶ δῆλον ἐξ 
ὧν αὐτὸς ὁ χρυσοῦς τὴν γλῶτταν. ὡς πρότερον ἐξεθέμεθα. 
\ N , ^ \ \ ec e , 93 
μετὰ τὸ εἰπεῖν τὰ Δεσποτικὰ ῥήματα, “ Κατάπεμψον, 
s ες X ^ Nw N / N A » 
φησί, * τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ "Αγιον, kai ποίησον τὸν μὲν ἄρτον 
τοῦτον τίµιον σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου, τὸ δὲ ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ 
[3 € 
τούτῳ τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ cov, μεταβαλὼν τῷ ΠΠ νεύ- 


s 


pati cov τῷ Ayíw." Ταῦτα εἰ μὴ πείθουσι τοὺς φιλονεί- 
» 5 ^ A 5 / ^ ^ , / 
κως ἔχοντας. ἐλεεῖσθαι ἂν εἶεν δίκαιοι τῆς διπλῆς ἀγνοίας, 


καὶ τῆς εἰς βάθος πωρώσεως. P. G. clx., 1080-1089. 


Orthodox Confession. 1645 A.p. 
᾿Ἠρώτησις pl. 
Πόσα πράγματα ζητοῦνται εἰς τὸ μυστήριον ; 
'Am. Τρία, ὕλη ἁρμόδιος, ὡς εἶναι τὸ ἵδωρ εἰς τὸ Barr 


322 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


τίσμα ὁ ἄρτος kal ὁ οἶνος εἰς τὴν εὐχαριστίαν 70 ἔλαιον, 
καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ κατὰ τὸ μυστήριον. Δεύτερον ὁ ἱερεύς. ὅπου 
νὰ εἶναι νομίμως κεχειροτονημένος ἢ ὁ ἐπίσκοπος. Τρίτον ἡ 
TY ne / / \ \ 4 ^ , 
ἐπίκλησις τοῦ A yťov Πνεύματος, καὶ τὸ εἶδος τῶν λογίων. 
e ^ - e ^ ^ 
μετὰ ὁποῖα ὁ ἱερεὺς ἁγιάζει τὸ μυστήριον τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ 
“Αγίου Ἰ]νεύματος μὲ γνώμην ἀποφασισμένην TOV νὰ τὸ 
ἁγιάσῃ. SCHAFF, The Creeds of Christendom, ii., 374-875. 


᾿Ἠρώτησις ρὗ. 


Ab / / Ἂς X , > \ / ^ " 
{πρέπει và φυλάττεται εἰς τὸ μυστήριον τοῦτο; 
/ c 

Arm. . .. Τέταρτον πρέπει, νὰ ἔχῃ ὁ ἱερεὺς τοιαύτην 
γνώμην εἰς τὸν καιρόν, ὅπου ἁγιάζει τὰ δῶρα, πῶς αὐτὴ ἡ 

, / ^ » \ c > y, ^ » / , 
οὐσία τοῦ ἄρτου καὶ ἡ οὐσία τοῦ οἴνου μεταβάλλεται εἰς 
τὴν οὐσίαν τοῦ ἀληθινοῦ σώματος καὶ αἵματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, 

\ ^ , s ae / [4 © N > v. 
διὰ τῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Ayiov Πνεύματος, οὗ τὴν ἐπίκλησιν 
κάμει τὴν ὥραν ἐκείνην, διανατεληὼς τὸ μυστήριον τοῦτο, 
2) , \ A [4 A 6 KE , Ἂς TI ^ y Ν 
ἐπευχόμενος καὶ λέγων ατάπεμψον τὸ Ilvevua σου τὸ 
u , > c ^ \ > \ \ s ^ ^ N 
Άγιον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ταῦτα" kal 
ποίησον τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ 
σου. τὸ δὲ ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ τούτῳ τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ 
σου. μεταβαλὼν τῷ Ilvevuarı σου τῷ ᾿Αγίῳ." Μετὰ γὰρ 
τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα ἡ μετουσίωσις παρευθὺς γίνεται, καὶ 
» , € » > \ > \ ^ ^ ^ \ 
ἀλλήσει ὁ ἄρτος εἰς TO ἀληθινὸν σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ 
ὁ οἶνος εἰς τὸ ἀληθινὸν αἷμα. SCHAFF, op. cit. ii., 381-382. 


Synod of Jerusalem. 1672 A.p. 
"Opos ιε!. 


.. . Αποπτύομεν δὲ ὡς ἀλλότριον τῆς Ἀριστιανικῆς 
διδασκαλίας τὸ τὴν ἀκεραιότητα τῶν μυστηρίων ἀπαιτεῖν 
τὴν χρῆσιν τοῦ ynivov πράγματος ' ἀντίκειται γὰρ TE 
μυστηρίῳ τῆς προσφορᾶς. ὃ ῥήματι ὑπαρκτικῷ νομοθετηθὲν 
καὶ τῇ ἐπικλήσει τοῦ Αγίου Πνεύματος ἁγιασθὲν τελειοῦται 
τῇ ὑπάρξει τοῦ σημαινομένου, τοῦ σώματος δηλαδὴ καὶ 
αἵματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ. ... SCHAFF, op. cit. ii., 422-423. 


APPENDIX 323 


Declaration of Greeks to the Marquis de Nointel 
ο. 1671 A.D. 


A ^ ^ ^ 
Περὶ δὲ τοῦ φρικτοῦ μυστηρίου. τῆς εὐχαρ/στίας. πιστεύο- 
μεν καὶ ὁμολογοῦμεν ἀδιστάκτως. ὅτι τὸ ζῶν σῶμα τοῦ 
^ ^ 7 ^ , 

Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿]ησοῦ Χριστοῦ πάρεστιν ἀοράτως πραγµα- 
^ / , ^ / , \ es » ^ \ 
τικῇ παρουσίᾳ ἐν τῷ μυστηρίῳ ἐν γὰρ τῷ εἰπεῖν τὸν 
λειτουργοῦντα ἱερέα μετὰ τὰ Κυριακὰ λόγια. “ Ποίησον 
τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον τίμιον σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ σου. τὸ δὲ 

^ / ΄ © ^ r ^ 
ἐν TQ ποτηρίῳ τούτῳ τίμιον αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ cov µετα- 
\ ^ ΄ / ne [ovv / ^ 5 / ^ 
βαλὼν τῷ Πνεύματί cov τῷ ᾽Αγίω. τότε τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ τοῦ 
t LZ t . t 
΄ ^ > [- \ » 
Παναγίου Πνεύματος, ὑπερφυῶς καὶ ἀρρήτως ὁ μὲν ἄρτος 
^ , A ^ ^ A 
μεταποιεῖται εἰς αὐτὸ ἐκεῖνο τὸ ἴδιον σῶμα τοῦ Σωτῆρος 
^ ^ , ^ ε 5 
Χριστοῦ πραγματικῶς καὶ ἀληθῶς καὶ κυρίως, ὁ δὲ οἶνος 
, \ © ^ 
εἰς τὸ ζωηρὸν αἷμα αὐτοῦ. 
Covet, Some Account of the Present Greek Church, etc., p. 44. 


Oath of a Russian Bishop at his Consecration 


Eme ΕΏΡΥΙΟ U MY APCTBY|D cosepmarucs BE Bo:kecr- 
BEHHBŇ «Ἀπτγρτίπ npecymniecrpaenuii za m hpose 
XpHcCTOBH, AKO BOCTOYHIN H Hamm Poccifickin yumn- 
Telie APEBHÍH yyaTb, nanuTiew u Ahitcrniemsb CBATATO 
Jyxa «pes» npuasBauie Apxiepeitckoe, nin iepeitckoe, 
Bb CJIoBechxe Bory Orny MOJAHTEIBHBIXB! „COTBOPH 
y60 x1bOt ceit, sectHoe T$10 Xpucra - Teoero,” u 


mpoyas. 
ΜΑΙΤΖΕΝΥ, Die Sacramente, etc., pp. 408-409. 


Gabriel of Philadelphia. 1541-1616 A.n. 


Apologia pro Ecelesia Orient. 


\ n / \ > / ^ \ / 
Διὰ τοῦτο δικαίως καὶ εὐλόγως τιμᾶται. καὶ προπέµπεται, 
καὶ ὑμνεῖται ὑπὸ πάντων τῶν ὀρθοδόξων Χριστιανῶν οὐκ ὡς 
, \ a ^ > 325€ ^ “ V ο 
σάρκα καὶ αἷμα Χριστοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς δῶρον ἅγιον, καὶ ὕλην 
> / / , \ \ ^ , / ne / 
ἀναγκαίον γενέσθαι εὐθὺς διὰ τῆς ἐπικλήσεως τοῦ ᾽Αγίου 
4 © ^ ^ 
Πνεύματος αἷμα καὶ σῶμα Χριστοῦ. 
.. . τῆς μετουσιώσεως. τῆς διὰ τῆς τοῦ ἱερέως εὐλογίας 
\ ΄ , 
καὶ ἐντεύξεως. ἁγιασμὸν ἐχούσης ἀνεξάλειπτον, τιμὴν καὶ 


324 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


^ ^ A , τὸ ,F ^ / 

κλῖσιν κεφαλῆς καὶ γονάτων ἀπαγορεύετε μὴ προσφέρει»: 

N S οφ ^ N ^ e Ne > / 

. τὰ δὲ ἅγια δῶρα, κατὰ δῶρα ἅγια καὶ ὕλην ἄφιερωμέ- 

ν ^ © ^ - ve \ , ὃ / ὃ \ ^ JA / \ 

ην τῷ ©ew ορισµένην kal ἐπιτηδείαν. διὰ τῆς εὐλογίας καὶ 

τῆς δυνάμεως τῶν εὐχῶν γενέσθαι σάρκα Χριστοῦ καὶ αἷμα, 

^ ^ / \ s 
μᾶλλον τιμᾶσθαι δέον καὶ γεραίρεσθαι. 
Opuscula, ed. R. Simon, pp. 6, 15-16. 


Eustratius Argentes. Το. 1755-1760 A.n. 
Σύνταγμα κατὰ Ačúnov. Tu. Β΄. Πρότ. a! 
> [4 Ke: \ n ^ / Ce N ^ 
Ἐπειδήπερ ὁ ἁγιασμὸς τοῦ Κυριακοῦ Δείπνου, ὁ ὑπὸ τῶν 
e , / , e , / > , 
Ἱερέων γινόμενος, ὀφειλει ὑπάρχειν τεθεμελιωμένος ἐπάνω 
» ^ ^ ^ vm ^ n^ ^ 
eis τὴν πρᾶξιν αὐτοῦ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿]ησοῦ Χριστοῦ. 
ὅστις ὕστερα ἀπὸ τὴν ὑπουργίαν τοῦ ἱερωτάτου ἐκείνου 
/ ph [4 ^ ^ 99 \ 
συμποσίου, προσέταξε λέγων": **'lobro ποιεῖτε. Διὰ 
^ \ c ^ / \ 1 s > ^ 
τοῦτο Kal ἡμεῖς dpovrítouev καὶ ἐπιμελούμεθα. ἐν τῇ 
πρώτη Ἱροτάσει στοχάσασθαι καὶ ἐρευνῆσαι. τίνι τρόπῳ 
αὐτὸς ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν ἱερούργησε τὸν ἄρτον τῆς εὐχαριστίας. 
καὶ τὸ ποτήριον. Καὶ ἀφοῦ μάθωμεν τοῦτο. τότε εὔκολον 
εἶναι νὰ καταλάβωμεν, καὶ τὸν τρόπον ὁποῦ οἱ Ἱερεῖς πρέπει 
νὰ ἱερουργοῦσιν ' ἐπειδὴ ἡ ἱερουργία τῶν Ἱερέων. εἶναι 
συμπέρασμα τῆς ἱερουργίας τοῦ Χριστοῦ. 


Πρότασις A! 

"O Κύριος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦς Ἀριστός. δι εὐχαριστίας. καὶ 
εὐλογίας. καὶ ἐπικλήσεως. ἱερούργησε, kal µετουσίωσε τὸν 
ἄρτον καὶ τὸν οἶνον. eis ἴδιον ἑαυτοῦ σῶμα καὶ αἷμα - οὐχὶ 
δὲ διὰ τῶν ῥημάτων ἐκείνων * “ Τοῦτό ἐστι TO σῶμά μοῦ." 
Εἴρηκε γὰρ ταῦτα τὰ λόγια. ἵνα σαφηνίσῃ τοῖς ἀποστό- 
λοις, τί εἴη ἐκεῖνο. ὅπερ ἤδη τότε εὐλόγησεν. Ρ. 89 ἃ. 


ρα. Du ΕΙ. Πρυ.α. ο) 
Συμπεραίνομεν τοιγαροῦν, ὅτι ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν ᾿]ησοῦς 
Χριστὸς διὰ τῆς παντοδυνάµου αὐτοῦ εὐλογίας. ὡς Θεὸς 
ἱερούργησε, καὶ µετουσίωσε τὸν ἄρτον καὶ οἶνον εἰς Σῶμα 
ἑαυτοῦ καὶ Αἷμα: ἀλλ ὡς ὧν καὶ τελειο ἄνθρωπος, 


APPENDIX 325 


συνῆψε τῇ θείᾳ αὐτοῦ εὐλογίᾳ καὶ εὐχαριστίας. καὶ εὐχάς. 
καὶ ἐπικλήσεις πρὸς τὸν οὐράνιον αὐτοῦ Πατέρα. ἐπάρας 
τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν. καὶ ἀναδείξας τῷ Θεῷ καὶ 
Πατρὶ τὰ προκείμενα. . . . Kita παρέσχεν αὐτά. καὶ τοῖς 
᾿Αποστόλοις εἰς τὸ φαγεῖν καὶ ποιεῖν, ἐξηγησάμενος αὐτοῖς, 
καὶ τί εἴη τὸ διδόμενον, Σῶμα δηλονότι καὶ Αἷμα αὐτοῦ. 
Τοιγαροῦν τὰ ῥήματα ἐκεῖνα ἐξηγητικὰ μόνον τοῦ 
Μυστηρίου εἰσίν, οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἁγιαστικά, ἡ γὰρ μετουσίω- 
σις, διὰ τῆς εὐλογίας. καὶ τῆς εὐχαριστίας, καὶ ἐπικλήσεως 
ἐγένετο, ὅπερ ἔδει ἀποδεῖξαι. P. 65 ἃ. 


Ibid. Tu. B'. Ilpór. a'. προσ. B'. κεφ. y! 


Περὶ τοῦ, τί σηµαίνει ἡ εὐλογία τῶν κτισμάτων, ἡ γινομένη πρὸς τὰ 
λοιπὰ κτίσματα. 


^ ^ , 2 
* Tláca δόσις ἀγαθή. καὶ πᾶν δώρημα τέλειον, ἄνωθέν 
> ^ , ^ X ^ , 45 X [4 
ἐστι καταβαῖνον ἐκ τοῦ llarpôs τῶν φώτων. φησὶν ὁ 
Ἰάκωβος ὁ ἱερὸς ᾿Αδελφόθεος * τοιγαροῦν καὶ πᾶσα εὐλογία. 
x ^ ^ 
ἡ πρὸς τὰ κτίσματα γινομένη, ὀφειλει map’ τοῦ Πατρὸς τῶν 
φώτων, τουτέστιν ἐκ μόνου τοῦ Θεοῦ προέρχεσθαι"' καὶ 
ἀγκαλὰ καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι λέγονται εὐλογεῖν ἄλλα κτίσματα. 
ὅμως αὕτη ἡ ἀνθρωπίνη εὐλογία καταχρηστικῶς εὐλογία 
ὀνομάζεται " μόνος γὰρ ὁ Θεός ἐστιν ὁ κυρίως εὐλογῶν 
, , e \ \ ^ , , / > \ \ > / 
αὐτά ἡ δὲ διαφορὰ τῆς θείας εὐλογίας ἀπὸ τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην 
εὐλογίαν ἐν τούτω μόνῳ συνίσταται ' τουτέστιν. ὅτι ἐκείνη 
μὲν ἐκ μόνου τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀμέσως προέρχεται. ἡ δὲ ἀνθρωπίνη 
, / , , ^ ^ » , , [4 \ ^ ^ 
εὐλογία δι εὐχῶν τῶν ἀνθρώπων. ἐμμέσως παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ 
τελεσιουρηγεῖται. Οἱ ἄνθρωποι τοιγαροῦν. ἐπιχειριζόμενοι 
> A s / , \ » , > A > , 
εὐλογῆσαί τι κτίσμα. οὐδὲν ἄλλο πράττουσιν. εἰ μὴ εὐχάς. 
\ , M > , ^ ŤA > , eu e \ 
καὶ δεήσεις. καὶ ἐπικλήσεις τοῦ θείου ὀνόματος ἵνα ὁ Θεὸς 
, , ^ \ , ^ » / 
καταξιώση εὐλογῆσαι καὶ δωρήσασθαι τοῖς ἄλλοις κτίσμασι 
ἐκεῖνο τὸ καλόν. τὸ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἐξαιτούμενον. Ilparrovaı 
^ ^ e » , , > s / » 
δὲ τοῦτο οἱ ἄνθρωποι οὐκ ἐξ ἀνθρωπίνης θελήσεως, οὔτε 
, , Ff. [4 ^ Pp > A 3.33 ^ ^ 
ἐξ ἰδίας ὁρμῆς κινούμενοι. ἀλλὰ κατ ἐντολὴν καὶ προστα- 
γὴν θεϊκήν - ἀναγινώσκομεν γὰρ τὴν τρανωτάτην ταύτην 


320 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF ΤΗΕ EUCHARIST 


προσταγὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ (Κεφ. ς΄. τοῦ Βιβλ. τῶν ᾿Αριθ.), ἔνθα 
r ^ Ν c S 
o Θεὸς ταῦτα ἐντελλεται πρὸς Mwvonv “ Λάλησον 
, N \ ^ en > ^ / er > , 
Aapov καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ. λέγων: Οὕτως εὐλογήσετε 
\ EN 11 / / τ ^ ς » / k 
τοὺς υἱοὺς ᾿Ισραήλ. λέγοντες αὐτοῖς " “ Εὐλογήσαι σε 
Κύριος καὶ φυλάξαι σε, Κύριος ἐπιφάναι τὸ πρόσωπον 
αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ δῴη σοι εἰρήνην᾽ καὶ ἐπιθήσουσι τὸ 
„ a 1 \ \ 5 Ν 3 , x , N s , , 
ὄνομά µου ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς Ισραήλ. καὶ ἐγὼ Κύριος εὐλογήσω 
> 7 99 / » , / e c » 
αὐτούς."  Προφανέστατον ἄρα ἐγένετο, ὅτι οἱ ἄνθρωποι. 
βουλόμενοι ἄλλο τι κτίσμα εὐλογῆσαι, οὐδὲν ὀφειλουσι 
ποιεῖν ἕτερον, εἰμὴ ἐπικαλεῖσθαι τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἵνα 
εὐλογήσῃ ἐκεῖνο τὸ πρᾶγμα, ὅπερ οἱ ἄνθρωποι αὐτοὶ 
βούλονται γενέσθαι εὐλογημένον ' τοῦτον τὸν κανόνα, καὶ 
, ^ / > , , , , L4 
ταύτην τὴν θείαν ἐντολήν, ἠκολούθησαν σύμπαντες οἱ 
πάλαι Πατέρες καὶ Πατριάρχαι ἐν τῷ εὐλογεῖν ἄλλα κτίσ- 
ματα, τὸ ὁποῖον διὰ τρανωτάτων παραδειγμάτων ἐν τῷ 
ἑξῆς Ἰκεφαλ. ἀποδειχθήσεται. Prah 


Ibid. Tu. B'. mpór.a. προσ. Bl. keď.) 
Δείκνυται τοῦτο αὐτὸ καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς κοινῆς συνηθείας τῶν Χριστιανῶν. 


'"Edv τις τῶν Χριστιανῶν ζητήσῃ εὐλογίαν παρ᾽ Ἔπι- 
σκόπου. ἢ Ἱερέως. 7) γονέων, ἢ γέροντος. καὶ εἴπη πρὸς αὐτόν. 
«Εὐλόγησόν µε Πάτερ! " οὐκ ἀποκρίνεται, λέγων " ** Εὐλογῶ 
ce!" ἀλλ᾽ ἀποκρίνεται. λέγων > “o Θεὸς εὐλογήσαι ce!” ἢ 

ή ἢ 
* Eins εὐλογημένος παρὰ Θεοῦ! " ἢ ““ὁ Θεὸς φυλάξαι ce! 
σώσαὶ ce! ἁγιάσαι ce! βοηθήσαι cov! ὑγιάνοι ce. 
ἐλεήσαι ve!” καὶ τὰ ὅμοια. Καὶ κατὰ λόγον τῆς ζητου- 
μένης εὐλογίας προσευχὴν πρὸς Θεὸν μεταχειρίζεται ὁ 
εὐλογῶν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ζητοῦντος τὴν εὐλογίαν: ὥστε τόσον 
- \ » , \ ne / ος > , / , ng 
εἶναι và εἴπη κἀνεὶς τοῦ Ἱερέως. * Εὐλόγησόν µε Πάτερ: 

\ / a. \ » ες E? e N. > ^ II , | 2» 
καὶ τόσον εἶναι và εἴπῃ, ** Εὗξαι ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ. Πατερ: 

P. 75 a. 
Ibid. Tu. B'. Ilpór. β! 


Οἱ 'lepeis τῶν Χριστιανῶν ὀφειλουσιν ἱερουργεῖν τὸν 
ἄρτον καὶ οἶνον τοῦ Κυριακοῦ Δείπνου δι εὐχαριστίας, καὶ 


APPENDIX 327 


, / A. d , , M ὃ \ ^ € , 66 ^ / 
εὐλογίας. καὶ ἐπικλήσεως, οὐχὶ διὰ τῶν ῥημάτων, “Τοῦτό 
3 ^ ^ , .. Ἢ ^ , X ^ x 
ἐστι τὸ σῶμά μου." ὀφειλουσι δὲ προφέρειν καὶ ταῦτα τὰ 

, ὧν» ἢ \ Xe ^ > » Ὁ» / e 
λόγια, οὐχὶ πρὸς τὸ ἱερουργῆσαι. ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα δείξωσιν. ὅτι 
σκοποῦσιν ἐπιτελέσαι ἐκεῖνο, ὅπερ ἐποίησεν ὁ Χριστός * καὶ 

/ , / , ^ \ \ \ , 
προσέτι ὀφείλουσιν ἐξηγεῖν καὶ πρὸς τοὺς µεταλαμβάνοντας 

\ , , ^ 0 , \ © r N , , > \ 
τὸ διδόμενον αὐτοῖς. καθάπερ καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς ἐξήγησεν αὐτὸ 
πρὸς τοὺς ᾿Αποστόλους. Pp. 85 b-86 a. 


dbi πα Β΄. por. β΄. (a!) 

᾿Επειδὴ ἀπεδείχθη σαφέστατά τε καὶ καθαρώτατα. ὅτι 6 

Κύριος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦς δι’ εὐλογίας. καὶ εὐχαριστίας. καὶ 
^ \ Ld , \ 
ἐπικλήσεως τοῦ οὐρανίου Ilarpos ἱερούργησε τὸν ἄρτον, καὶ 
τὸ ποτήριον τοῦ Κυριακοῦ Δείπνου, καὶ µετουσίωσεν αὐτὰ 
εἰς ἐδικόν του σῶμα καὶ αἷμα. καὶ ἔπειτα ἐξήγησε καὶ 
3 , \ \ \ , ^ er" \ , \ 
ἐσαφήνισε πρὸς τοὺς Μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, τί εἴη τὸ εὐλογηθὲν 
ἐκεῖνο, καὶ διδόμενον αὐτοῖς * καὶ τελος προσέταξεν αὐτοῖς 
ποιεῖν τὸ αὐτό, ὅπερ ἐποίησεν αὐτός. εἰπών: “ Τοῦτο 
“ s ei \ c ^ ^ » 

ποιεῖτε "᾿᾿ πρόδηλον γίνεται. ὅτι καὶ οἱ ἱερεῖς τῶν Ἀριστια- 

^ , ^ > , \ ^ > » , 
νῶν ὀφειλουσι μιμεῖσθαι αὐτόν, kal ποιεῖν ἀπαραλλάκτως. 
e nd / > , > 
0, τι ἐποίησεν αυτος. P. 86 ἃ. 


Ibid. Tu. Β΄. Ilpór.B'. (ξή, £6") 

c \ , € ^ , n , lá \ c N , ^ 
O yap Κύριος ἡμῶν ᾿]ησοῦς. ἐξετέλεσε τὸ ἱερὸν ἐκεῖνο 

m ες T , \ c » x ^ \ , 
δεῖπνον, καὶ ὡς Θεός, καὶ ὡς ἄνθρωπος, καὶ καθὸ μὲν Θεός, 
7 dei ὶ παντοδυνάµω αὐτοῦ βουλήσει καὶ ἐνεργεία 
τῇ θείᾳ καὶ μῳ αὐ ή ργείᾳ 

/ \ ” \ \ 5) » ^ 
εὐλόγησε. καὶ µετουσίωσε τὸν ἄρτον, καὶ τὸν οἶνον eis σῶμα 
e ^ \ - \ NM ^ ^ Fe > ^ 
ἑαυτοῦ. καὶ αἷμα * καθὸ δὲ ἄνθρωπος. συνῆψε TH θείᾳ αὐτοῦ 
εὐλογίᾳ προσευχὰς πρὸς Θεόν. καὶ ἐπικλήσεις. ἐπάρας τοὺς 
^ \ 
ὀφθαλμοὺς eis οὐρανὸν πρὸς παντοδύναμον Θεὸν καὶ Πατέρα 
^ ^ e , 
αὐτοῦ. kai εὐχαριστήσας αὐτῷ, εὐλόγησεν, ἱερούργησε, καὶ 
µετουσίωσε τὸν ἄρτον καὶ τὸ ποτήριον. 
^ ei ^ ^ , 

Kai τοῦτο µόνον ἐστίν, ὅπερ ἐντειλατο ἡμῖν ποιεῖν, εἰπών * 
^ ^ s ei N 
“Tovro ποιεῖτε"᾿ τουτέστιν, ὅσον ἐποίησεν αὐτός. καθὸ 
Č e ax ^ 
ἄνθρωπος * ὅσον δὲ πάλιν ἐποίησε. καθὸ Θεός. δὲν ἠμπορεῖ 
TN \ \ \ ^ , \ / / Νο ^ \ 
© ἱερεὺς νὰ τὸ μιμηθῇ, ἀλλὰ µόνον δέεται καὶ ἐπικαλεῖ καὶ 


328 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ἱκτεύει. ἵνα TO” Ayıov Πνεῦμα. εὐδοκίᾳ τοῦ οὐρανίου Πατρός, 
\ / ^ ^ en / \ / 
καὶ συνεργεία τοῦ μονογενοῦς Υἱοῦ, κατέλθῃ καὶ ποιήσῃ: 
\ , \ „ \ / > / / 
καὶ τελειώσῃ τὴν ἄρρητον καὶ θείαν ἐκείνην μεταβολήν. 
P. 100 a, b. 
Ibid. Tu. B'. pdr. β'. (oß', oy!, 08", oe’, oc) 
^ [4 , ^ , 
Ἔκ τῶν ῥηθέντων τοιγαροῦν, ἐπληροφορήθημεν - 
14 m^ ^ \ > x ^ 
(α’.) Ὅτι ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν ᾿]ησοῦς, Θεὸς ὧν ἀληθινὸς, τῇ 
/ 3 n , \ , > / > , 
θείᾳ αὐτοῦ βουλήσει καὶ παντοδυνάμῳ ἐξουσίᾳ εὐλόγησε 
\ : ¢ N » \ X 5 » » A » \ 
καὶ µετουσίωσε τὸν ἄρτον καὶ τὸν οἶνον εἰς ἴδιον καὶ ἀληθὲς 
αὐτοῦ σῶμα καὶ αἷμα * οὐχὶ δὲ διὰ τῶν ῥημάτων ἐκείνων, 
“ Ποῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά µου. καὶ τὸ αἷμα nov." (β’.) Ὕστερα 
» \ ^ ^ 
ἀπὸ τὴν εὐλογίαν τοῦ ἄρτου καὶ τοῦ οἴνου, ἔκλασε τὸν 
» - Já ^ 
ἄρτον καὶ ἐκέρασε καὶ τὸν οἶνον - καὶ ἔπειτα ἔδωκε τοῖς 
ἑαυτοῦ μαθηταῖς καὶ Αποστόλοις. (γ΄.) Καὶ ἐν τῷ διδόναι 
ἐξήγησε καὶ ἐσαφήνισεν αὐτοῖς τὴν ἔννοιαν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν 
τοῦ διδομένου. εἰπὼν αὐτοῖς ' * Λάβετε, φάγετε, πίετε ἐξ 
αὐτοῦ πάντες - τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι τὸ σῶμά µου. καὶ τὸ αἷμά 
. e c ^ 3 
μου." (δ’.) Ὅτι αὐτὸς ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν, ὡς àv καὶ τέλειος 
ἄνθρωπος, συνῆψε τῇ θεϊκη αὐτοῦ εὐλογίᾳ καὶ εὐχάς. καὶ 
Β , ] 7 2 4 κα 
S , N Ν » / , ^ 
εὐχαριστίας. καὶ ἐπικλήσεις, πρὸς τὸν οὐράνιον αὐτοῦ lla- 
τέρα καὶ Θεόν. (€.) Ὅτι τέλος πάντων προσέταξε τοῖς 
^ ^ ^ ei , 
ἑαυτοῦ μαθηταῖς. ποιεῖν ὅσον ἐποίησεν αὐτός. εἰπών " 
“Touro ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν." 
\ N 7 ^ c , / \ / , » 
Τὸ δὲ τί δηλοῖ ἡ εὐλογία. καὶ πόσα σημαινόμενα ἔχει. 
\ / \ » c > / ^ > , » M \ 
καὶ ποίαν διαφορὰν ἔχει ἡ εὐλογία τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἀπὸ τὴν 
» s n ^ \ \ ^ , bl c 
εὐλογίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ μὲ ποῖον τρόπον ὀφειλουσιν οἱ 
» > - N e / \ , \ N 
ἄνθρωποι εὐλογεῖν καὶ ἁγιάζειν τὰ Μυστήρια. καὶ τὰ 
λοιπὰ ἱερατικὰ πράγματα. ἐξηγήθη καὶ ἀπεδείχθη τρανώ- 
Ξ A A , 
tata ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ B'. Προσθήκη τῆς A". Ilpordceos. 
c Fe ^ 7 ^ 
Λοιπὸν καὶ οἱ ἱερεῖς τῶν Χριστιανῶν, ἐπιχειριζόμενοι 
> / ee δι / a A , 
ἐκτελέσαι τὸ ἱερὸν Μυστήριον τοῦ Κυριακοῦ Δείπνου. 
\ 5 
ὀφείλουσι. | (A'.) Δαμβάνειν ἄρτον ἀληθινόν, καὶ οἶνον 
συνειθισμένον ὕδατι κεκραμένον. (Β’.) "ἔπειτα δοξολογεῖν 
« ^ ^ > ^ X ^ > 
καὶ ὑμνεῖν τὸν Θεόν, καὶ εὐχαριστεῖν αὐτῷ ὑπὲρ τῶν aya- 


ΑΡΡΕΝΡΙΧ 329 


θῶν καὶ εὐεργεσιῶν, ἃς ἐποίησε τῷ γένει τῶν ἀνθρώπων. 
(1΄.) Μνημονεύειν τῆς ἐνανθρωπήσεως τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγου. 
\ ^ , M , \ / ^ 
καὶ τῆς συλλήψεως, καὶ γεννήσεως, καὶ βαπτίσμου. καὶ 
διδαχῆς. καὶ θαυμασίων, καὶ προδοσίας. καὶ πάθους. καὶ 
, ^ ^ 
σταυρώσεως, καὶ ταφῆς. καὶ ἀναστάσεως. καὶ ἀναλήψεως 
αὐτοῦ : ἐπειδὴ εἶπε, * Τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνη- 
σιν." -(A'.) Μάλιστα δὲ πάντων ὀφείλουσι, μνημονεύειν 
^ \ , rA , - [4 » , \ \ € , 
τῆς νυκτὸς ἐκείνης. ἐν ἣ μέλλων ἔρχεσθαι ἐπὶ τὸ ἑκούσιον 
\ ^ ^ e 
πάθος, ἐξετέλεσε τὸ Μυστικὸν ἐκεῖνο δεῖπνον ' ὅτε λαβὼν 
5 , > 
ἄρτον καὶ οἶνον, καὶ εὐχαριστήσας. καὶ εὐλογήσας. ἔδωκε 
τοῖς μαθηταῖς καὶ ᾿Αποστόλοις, εἰπών * “Λάβετε, φάγετε. 
^ M ^ s ^ 
τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμα pov“ καὶ * Πίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες. 
^ / , \ © , “5 ΄ / \ ε , 
τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι τὸ αἷμά pov.” Ταύτην, φημί, τὴν ὑπόθεσιν, 
, / ^ PINE ^ \ / C ^ ^ 
ὀφείλουσι διηγεῖσθαι οἱ ἱερεῖς. καὶ προφέρειν ῥητῶς. καὶ 
ἐκεῖνα τὰ λόγια τοῦ Κυρίου, οὐχ ἵνα διὰ τούτων ἱερουρ- 
γήσωσιν, arr’ ἵνα δι αὐτῶν παραστήσωσιν, ὅτι σκοποῦ- 
σιν ἐπιτελέσαι αὐτὸ ἐκεῖνο. ὅπερ ἐποίησεν ὁ Χριστός. εἰς 
ἀνάμνησιν αὐτοῦ.  (E'.) Καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ὀφείλουσιν 
^ ^ M 
εὔχεσθαι, καὶ μετὰ θερμῶν δεήσεων ἐπικαλεῖσθαι τὸν Θεόν. 
". / \ , ^ \ c / N 
ἵνα καταπέµψη τὸ Πανάγιον Πνεῦμα, καὶ ἱερουργήσῃ, καὶ 
/ ^ 5 7 ^ 
μετουσιώσῃ τὸν ἄρτον eis σῶμα * τὸν δὲ οἶνον, εἰς αἷμα τοῦ 
Κυρίου" τὴν ὁποίαν ἐπίκλησιν, ἡ ᾿Εκκλησία ὀνομάζει 
, / r SN Aa > \ A e \ > 9 ^ 
εὐλογίαν. (ς΄.) Kai ὕστερα ἀπὸ TOV ἀἆγιασμον ἀκολουθεῖ 
ἡ κλάσις τοῦ ἄρτου, καθὼς ἔκαμεν ὁ Χριστός ' ταύτην δὲ 
^ , ^ » ^ PIA / M ^ » 
τὴν κλᾶσιν τοῦ ἄρτου νῦν ἡ ᾿Εκκλησία µελισμον του ἄρτου 
, z e e ^ 
ὀνομάζει. (Z'.) Kai τέλος πάντων, ὁ ἱερεὺς διαδίδει τοῖς 
, \ , , ^ , ^ ^ 
μεταλαμβάνουσι τὸ Μυστήριον, ἐξηγούμενος αὐτοῖς την 
ἔννοιαν τῶν διδομένων λόγων πρὸς αὐτούς. ὅτι “ Τοῦτό ἐστι 
τὸ σῶμα καὶ τὸ αἷμα τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος 
e ^ > ^ Y nm... , ^ e r ^ , / 
ἡμῶν ᾿]ησοῦ Χριστοῦ." καθάπερ καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς ἐποίησεν. 
x ^ m^ X ^ , 
εἰπὼν πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ: “" Τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμα 
µου καὶ τὸ αἷμα μου." 
^ \ > ^ 
Λοιπὸν τὰ Κυριακὰ ταῦτα λόγια κυρίως καὶ ἀληθῶς 
Já ^ , 
ἔχουσι τὸν καιρόν τους εἰς τὴν δόσιν τοῦ Μυστηρίου. καθά- 


330 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


περ εἶπεν αὐτὰ kal ὁ Ἀριστός * οὐχὶ δὲ ἐν TH ἱερουργία. H 

ρ ρ X ἢ ἱερουργίᾳ. 

ὃ \ / 5 e € X \ 5 «eT ^ “Ὁ \ 
ιαφορὰ μόνον εἶναι, ὅτι ὁ Χριστὸς εἶπε, οῦτό ἐστι τὸ 
m^ , 95 1 Ν » ^ > / “ > , 

σῶμά µου. ἐπειδὴ ἔδιδε τοῖς ᾿Αποστόλοις σῶμα ἐδικόν 

TOV" ὁ δὲ ἱερεὺς δὲν δίδει σῶμα ἐδικόν TOV, ἀλλὰ σῶμα τοῦ 

Χριστοῦ * διὰ τοῦτο δὲν λέγει, “ Τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά uov *" 

3 \ [4 e ες ^ , , M / m \ - ^ 

ἀλλὰ λέγει, ὅτι “ Τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ τίμιον σῶμα Kal αἷμα τοῦ 

Κυρίου καὶ Θεοῦ καὶ Σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ." 

Συμπεραίνομεν λοιπόν. ὅτι οἱ ἱερεῖς τῶν Χριστιανῶν 


, 


> F [4 ^ x » N N n ^ bz ^ 
ὀφείλουσι (epovpryetv rov ἄρτον καὶ τὸν οἶνον Tov Κυριακοῦ 
Δείπνου οὐχὶ διὰ τῶν λόγων ἐκείνων, “Τοῦτό µου ἐστὶ τὸ 
σι 29:03 \ \ A \ , . / \ , 
σῶμα: " ἀλλὰ διὰ προσευχῆς. καὶ εὐχαριστίας. kal εὐλο- 
s Ne n ^ / > , e/ » ^ 
γίας, καὶ ἐπικλήσεως τοῦ θείου ὀνόματος * ὅπερ ἔδει δεῖξαι. 
ο. 101 οὐ, 
Ibid. Tu. B'. ἩΠρότ. B'. προσ. B'. ávr.y!. (ἀπό. a.) 
5 ε ^ St 
Οὐ yàp εἶπεν ὁ Χριστός, ““ Τοῦτο Xéyere," ἀλλ᾽ εἶπε. 
ἐς Tovro ποιεῖτε ') τουτέστιν. ** ἀπαραλλάκτως οὕτω ποιεῖτε, 
Ψ " ^ » Te. » » , / 
ὅσον εἴδετε τῶς ἔκαμα ἐγώ" ἔλαβα ἄρτον. εὐχαρίστησα. 
» ο ^ ^ ^ 
εὐλόγησα. ἔκλασα, ἔδωκα. εἶπα. Τοῦτο ποιεῖτε καὶ ὑμεῖς ° 
λάβετε ἄρτον, εὐχαριστήσατε. εὐλογήσατε. κλάσατε, δότε, 
εἴπατε. P. 120 b. 


ETXEIPIAION περίεχον τὰ ἑπτὰ μυστήρια τῆς ἀνατολικῆς. καθολικῆς 
καὶ ἀποστολικῆς ἁγίας τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐκκχησίας κ.τ.λ. Athens, 


1832, p. 23 
ἨΠολλαχῶς παρανομοῦσι παῖδες Λατίνων ἐν τῷδε τῷ 
, / > [4 \ N / Lal ! 
θειωτάτῳ Μυστηρίῳ. ἐξαιρέτως δὲ τὰ τρία ταῦτα. . . RB. 
e N \ e \ ^ / , \ ^ > [4 
Οτι καὶ τὸν ἁγιασμὸν τῶν προκειμένων οὐ διὰ τῆς ἐπικλή- 
ne / ΄ € Ν ^ e / > \ N ^ 
σεως τοῦ ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματος ὑπὸ τῶν ἱερέων. ἀλλὰ διὰ τῶν 
Κυριακῶν λογίων τοῦ “ Λάβετε, φάγετε᾽ κ.τ.λ. γίνεσθαι 
δοξάζουσιν, ἃ διηγηματικῶς παρὰ τοῦ ἱερέως λέγεται. 
HENKE, Die katholische Lehre über die Consecrationsworte, etc., p. 20. 
EYXOAOTION TO META. Venice, 1891 
^ \ ^ , 
Inu. ὅτι ἡ δεικτικὴ ἀντωνυμία “ Γοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμα 
pov " καὶ πάλιν * Τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ αἷμά nov“ οὐκ ἀναφέρεται 


APPENDIX oj 


eis τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα ἀλλ᾽ εἰς ἅπερ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς λαβὼν 
τότε ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν αὑτοῦ καὶ εὐλογήσας ἔδωκε τοῖς µαθη- 
^ e ^ , ^ \ \ \ 1 ^ / > 
ταῖς avtov: ἐνταῦθα δὲ τὰ Δεσποτικὰ ἐκεῖνα λόγια ἐπα- 
ναλαμβάνεται διηγηματικῶς καὶ ἑπομένως περιττὴ ἡ δεῖξις 
^ ae! / > X ] \ ^ , ^ "m ^ 
μᾶλλον δὲ ἐναντία εἰς τὸ ὀρθὸν τῆς ἀνατολικῆς τοῦ Ἀριστοῦ 
ἐκκλησίας φρόνημα. P. 68 n. 


ΛΕΙΤΟΥΡΓΙΚΗ. ὑπὸ II. POMIIOTOY. Athens, 1869 
Βιβλ. B'. κεφ. β' 


᾿Ἐκφωνεῖ καὶ τὰ δι ὧν διέταξε τὸ μυστήριον ὁ Σωτήρ. 
ý , , 99 7 v Na x x , 
«Λάβετε. φάγετε... " ἵνα εἴπωμεν TO ᾽Αμὴν καὶ συνάμα 
ἐννοήσωμεν ὅτι δυνάµει τῆς διατάξεως τοῦ Σωτῆρος τελοῦ- 
μεν τὸν μυστικὸν Δεῖπνον καὶ ἐπικαλούμεθα τὸ [Πνεῦμα τὸ 
er , € ^ ^ / , » \ ^ 
Άγιον εἰς ἁγιασμὸν τῶν τιµίων Δώρων . . . ἀλλὰ καὶ 
ei , ^ ^ ^ 
ὅταν προεγγίση ἡ ἐπισημοτάτη στιγμὴ τοῦ ἁγιασμοῦ τῶν 
Δώρων διὰ τῆς ἐπικλήσεως τοῦ ᾿Απγίου Πνεύματος. τότε διὰ 
τῆς ἐκφωνήσεως “Tá σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν. . . ψάλλει 0 
^ e x a e "^ .. 
χόρος συντόμως καὶ uer αὐτοῦ ὁ λαὸς τὸ “ Σὲ ὑμνοῦμεν 
κτλ.. ὅπερ εἶναι ἐν συντόμῳ ἡ Evxapıoria, ἣν μυστικῶς 
5 ese ΄ / er » \ ^ » \ 
εἶπεν ὁ ἱερεύς. Διότι αὕτη ἄρχεται διὰ τοῦ '' Άξιον καὶ 
δίκαιον σὲ ὑμνεῖν, σὲ εὐλογεῖν, σὲ αἰνεῖν, σοὶ εὐχαριστεῖν. 
σὲ προσκυνεῖν," κτλ. Τὸ δὲ "καὶ δεόμεθα cov” τοῦ “ Xé 
[4 ^ 99 » ^ > ^ X ^ > / ^ 
ὑμνοῦμεν " ἀντιστοιχεῖ εἰς τὴν διὰ πολλῶν ἐπίκλησιν τοῦ 
"Αγίου Πνεύματος, τὴν γινομένην ὅτε ψάλλεται τὸ “ Ze 
ὑμνοῦμεν. P. 246. 


N > s e , b € N , 
Τὸν ἐπινίκιον ὕμνον περιφράζων καὶ ὁ λειτουργὸς é£a- 
κολουθεῖ τὴν εὐχαριστίαν. εὐχαριστῶν κατόπιν τῷ Θεῷ καὶ 
διὰ τὴν μεγάλην εὐεργεσίαν τῆς παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἀποστολῆς τοῦ 
Μονογενοῦς Tiov τοῦ πρὸς σωτηρίαν ἡμῶν. Διηγεῖται δὲ 
συντόμως, πῶς πληρώσας τὸ ἔργον τῆς ἡμῶν σωτηρίας 

, \ \ \ ^ qr 5 ^ \ , 
διέταξε καὶ τὸν μυστικὸν Δεῖπνον, καὶ ἐκφωνεῖ τὰς λέξεις 
* AdBere, φάγετε." “ Πίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες." Eis ταῦτα 

δὲ ἀπαντᾷ ὁ Χορὸς “᾿Αμήν᾽᾽ = γένοιτο" γένοιτο, λέ 
Q ρ μήν = ¥ γένοιτο, λέγει, 


332 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF ΤΗΕ EUCHARIST 


ἵνα καὶ νῦν ἀξιωθῶμεν τοῦ μυστικοῦ Δείπνου καὶ μεταβληθῇ 
ey , ^ , ' \ 5 > © , ^ 
ὁ ἄρτος eis Σῶμα Κυρίου, o δὲ oivos eis Αἷμα αὐτοῦ. 

Μετὰ ταῦτα ὁ λειτουργὸς λέγει μυστικῶς “ Meuvnuévou 
τοίνον τῆς σωτηρίου ταύτης ἐντολῆς καὶ πάντων τῶν ὑπὲρ 
ἡμῶν γεγενημένων, τοῦ Σταυροῦ, τοῦ Τάφου, τῆς τριημέρου 
> , ^ . > ^ » , ^ , ^ 
Αναστάσεως. τῆς eis Οὐρανοῦς ἀναβάσεως. τῆς ἐκ δεξιῶν 


, \ 
Kab 


/ ^ [4 \ , / / / > 
καθέδρας, τῆς δευτέρας καὶ ἐνδόξου πάλιν παρουσίας. 
ἐκφωνεῖ, ὑψῶν ἅμα τὸ Δισκάριον καὶ τὸ Ποτήριον διὰ 
σταυροειδῶν χειρῶν, “Tá σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν σοὶ προσφέρομεν 

N , \ \ / . , Ne \ \ ^ 
κατὰ πάντα καὶ διὰ πάντα, ἵνα ψάλῃ καὶ ὁ λαὸς διὰ τοῦ 
Χοροῦ συντόμως τὴν Evxapıoriav “ Σὲ ὑμνοῦμεν. σὲ εὐ- 
λογοῦμεν, σοὶ εὐχαριστοῦμεν, Κύριε. καὶ δεόµεθά σου ὁ 
Θεὸς ἡμῶν. Ψαλλομένης δὲ τῆς εὐχαριστίας ταύτης, 
ἐφίσταται ἡ σπουδαιοτάτη στιγμὴ τῆς Λειτουργίας. ὁ δι 
ἐπικλήσεως ἁγιασμὸς τῶν τιμίων Δώρων ' διότι ὁ ἱερεὺς 
τότε δέεται καὶ παρακαλεῖ καὶ ἱκετεύει τὸν Θεόν. ἵνα κατα- 

/ > νε ^ N , \ N / ^ \ ^ 
πέµψη ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ προκείμενα δῶρα τὸ [Πνεῦμα 
αὑτοῦ τὸ "Αγιον. καὶ ποιήσῃ τὸν μὲν ἄρτον τίμιον Σῶμα 
τοῦ Χριστοῦ. τὸ δὲ ἐν τῷ Ποτηρίῳ τίμιον Aiwa τοῦ Χριστοῦ. 

/ ^ N 2^ N / \ \ » £s 39 / 
Λέγων δὲ τὸ “ Καὶ ποίησον τὸ μὲν ἄρτον τοῦτον ^ σφραγίζει 
διὰ σταυροειδοῦς εὐλογίας (δι ἧς ἁγιάζονται πάντα τὰ 
μυστήρια κατ᾽ ἀρχαιοτάτην παράδοσιν, ὡς σημειοῖ o M. 
Βασίλειος) τὸν ἄρτον - λέγων δὲ τὸ * 70 ἐν τῷ Ποτηρίῳ 
τού ,* aN far Ν TI / ν \ \ ΕΙΝ 

TQ" . . . πάλιν σφραγίζει τὸ Ποτήριον κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν 
τρόπον " εἰπὼν δὲ τὸ “ Μεταβαλὼν τῷ Πνεύματί σου τῷ 
SAY / .. fe > , > N [4 € , ^ 
yo," σφραγίζει ἀμφότερα, ἐπιλέγοντος ἑκάστοτε τοῦ 
διακόνου τὸ ᾽Αμήν, ὅπερ τρισσεύει ἐν τῷ τελευταίῳ. 
Ῥρ. 247-248. 


IEPA ΚΑΤΗΧΗΣΙΣ, ὑπὸ A. N. BEPNAPAAKH. Ἔκδοσις 


τρίτη. Ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει, 1870. 
5 105. Ὑπὸ τίνος καὶ πῶς τελεῖται ἡ εὐχαριστία : 


. . . Πρὸς τέλεσιν δὲ τοῦ μυστηρίου τούτου ὁ ἱερεὺς 
μεταχειρίζεται οἶνον ἐρυθρὸν καὶ καθαρόν, ὃν ἐγχέει μετὰ 


APPENDIX 333 


x 6 R Já 
ὕδατος εἰς τὸ ἅγιον ποτήριον, καὶ ἄρτον ἐκ σίτου ἔνζυμον, 
ἀφ᾽ οὗ δὲ ἐν τῇ λειτουργείᾳ ἐπικαλεσθεὶς τὸ Άγιον Η νεῦμα, 
εὐλογήσῃ Ta ἅγια δῶρα, μεταβάλλεται ὁ μὲν ἄρτος εἰς TO 

γήσῃ τὰ ἅγια δῶρα, μ μὲν ἄρ 
» ^ e 5 ^ y , \ 
ἄχραντον σῶμα, ὁ δὲ οἶνος μετὰ τοῦ ὕδατος εἰς τὸ τίμιον 
αἷμα τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿]ησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Pp. 168-169. 


a» A 
$ 106. Κατὰ τί διαφέρουσιν αἱ ἑτερόδοξοι ἐκκλησίαι ὡς 
πρὸς τὸ μυστήριον τῆς εὐχαριστίας: 
. "AXAN καινοτομία τῆς λατινικῆς ἐκκλησίας περὶ TO 
^ 5 e PESE tte 
μυστήριον τοῦτο eive, ὅτι ἐν TH ἱερουργίαᾳ ὁ ἱερεὺς δὲν ἐπι- 
^ X X A € , M » X A > > , 
καλεῖται τὸν Θεὸν νὰ ἁγιάσῃ τὸν ἄρτον καὶ τὸν οἶνον. οὐδ 
, ^ , , e [4 \ s » s [4 , 
εὐλογεῖ αὐτά, ὅπως παρέλαβε Kal πράττει ἀνέκαθεν ἡ καθό- 
Nov ἐκκλησία, ἀλλ᾽ ἀναφέρει µόνον ἁπλῶς καὶ οὕτως εἰπεῖν 
ἱστορικῶς τὰ ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελίοις δεσποτικὰ ῥήματα" 
««Τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά pov,” καὶ "'Τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ αἷμά 
, 
pov,” καὶ πιστεύει ὅτι δι’ αὐτῶν καὶ δεικνυόµενα μόνον τὰ 
e ^ c , NS / \ , 
ἅγια δῶρα ἡγιάσθησαν καὶ ἐμετουσιώθησαν. Τὸ μέγεθος 
τῆς πλάνης ταύτης ἐννοεῖ TIS ἅμα ὡς ἀναλογισθῇ. ὅτι ὁ 
τρόπος οὗτος τοῦ ἁγιασμοῦ οὐ μόνον εἰς τὴν ἀρχαίαν καὶ 
διηνεκῆ παράδοσιν καὶ πρᾶξιν τῆς καθόλου ἐκκλησίας ἀντί. 
KELTAL, ὡς προείπαμεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν τὸν οὐσιώδη καὶ 
κύριον ὅρον τῆς τελέσεως παντὸς ἐν γένει μυστηρίου. ὅτι ὁ 
e \ > / ^ , ^ 2 ΄ » ^ / 
ἱερεὺς ὀφείλει và εὐχηθῆ ἐπικαλούμενος ἄνωθεν τὴν θείαν 
, \ > ^ \ 2 g / e > 
χάριν καὶ εὐλογῶν τὴν ἐν τῷ μυστηρίῳ Όλην. P. 170. 


Answer of the Great Church of Constantinople to the 
Papal Encyclical on Union. 1896 a.p. 


, 


ύ. 'H µία. ἁγία. καθολικὴ καὶ ἀποστολικὴ ᾿Εκκλησία 
τῶν ἑπτὰ Οἰκουμενικῶν Συνόδων παρεδέχετο. ὅτι τὰ τίμια 
δῶρα καθαγιάζονται μετὰ τὴν εὐχὴν τῆς ἐπικλήσεως τοῦ 
Αγίου Πνεύματος διὰ τῆς εὐλογίας τοῦ ἱερέως. ὡς µαρτυ- 
ροῦσι τὰ ἀρχαῖα τυπικὰ τῆς Ῥώμης καὶ τῶν Γαλλιῶν, 
ὕστερον ὅμως ἐκαινοτόμησε καὶ ἐν τούτῳ ἡ παπικὴ ᾿Εκκλη- 
σία. ἀποδεξαμένη αὐθαιρέτως τὴν καθαγίασιν τῶν τιμίων 
δώρων ὡς γινομένην σὺν τῇ ἐκφωνήσει τῶν Κυριακῶν λο- 


334 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


γίων  * Λάβετε, φάγετε" τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά μου :” καί, 
« Π ίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες ' τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι τὸ αἷμά pov.” 
P. 32. 
EPMHNEIA TON IEPON TEAETON τῆς ἀνατολικῆς ὀρθοδόξου 
Ἐκκλησίας, . .. ὑπὸ NIKOAAOY IIEPZIAOY. Ἔκδοσις 
δευτέα. Ev ᾿Αθήναις, 1905. 


Ἢ Το N ^ ^ , ^ , ^ 
p- ὅτε τελεῖται τὸ μυστήριον τοῦ σώματος καὶ 
αἵματος τοῦ Κυρίου: 

, \ / ^ , \ er ^ 

Απ. Τὸ μυστήριον τοῦ σώματος καὶ αἵματος του Kv- 
ρίου τελεῖται, ὁπότε, μετὰ τὴν ἐκφώνησιν τῶν λόγων τῶν 
ῥηθέντων ὑπὸ τοῦ 'lycoU Χριστοῦ ἐπὶ τῆς συστάσεως τοῦ 

/ [T4 , , EN , 1 Ν ^ r X 

μυστηρίου ** Λάβετε, φάγετε, τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά µου, τὸ 
« \ e ^ / , » e ^ ,» ee / H 
ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν κλώμενον. eis ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν. ΠΠ ίετε ἐξ 
αὐτοῦ πάντες - τοῦτο ἐστι τὸ αἷμα µου τὸ τῆς καινῆς Δια- 
θήκης. τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καὶ πολλῶν ἐκχυνόμενον, εἰς ἄφεσιν 
ἁμαρτιῶν," καὶ μετὰ τὴν ἐκφώνησιν “Ta σὰ ἐκ τῶν σῶν 
σοὶ προσφέρομεν κατὰ πάντα καὶ διὰ πάντα. ὁ ἱερουργῶν 
, ^ \ ^ Now N , ^ \ e 
ἐπικαλεῖται τὸ Ilvevua τὸ "Ayıov καὶ εὐλογεῖ τὰ ἅγια 
δώρα. P. 70, 


Missale Richenovense 


Lateinische und Griechische Messen aus dem zweiten bis sechsten 
Jahrhundert. Herausgegeben von Franz Joseph Mone. Frankfurt 
am Main, 1850. 

(1) 


Ρ. 15. Domini ac dei nostri sempeterni gloriam de- 
praecemur. orantis uti hoc sacrificium tua benedictione. 
benedicas et sancti spiritus tul rore perfundas. ut accipi- 
entibus universis. legitima sit eucharestia per Jam Xpm 
filium tuum deum ac dominum conservatoremque nostrum. 
cui est aput te domine cum spiritum sanctum regnum 
sempiternum perpetua divinitas in secula seculorum amen. 


(2) 
p.21. Recolentes igitur. et servantes praecepta uni- 
geniti. depraecamur pater omnipotens. ut his creaturis 


APPENDIX 990 


altario tuo superpositis spiritus sanctificationis infundas, 
ut per transfusione caelestis. adgue invisibilis sacramenti. 
panis hie mutatur, in carne, et calex translatus in san- 
guine, sit totius gratia, sit sumentibus medicina. p. d. 


(3) 

pp. 23-24. CoLLEcTIo. Deus Abraham. deus Isaac. 
deus Jacob deus et pater domini nostri Ihu Xpi tu de 
caelis tuis. propitius affavens. hoc sacrificum nostrum. 
indullentissima pietate proseguere. discendat domine ple- 
nitudo. magistatis. divinitatis, pietatis. virtutis, bene- 
dietionibus et gloriae tuae. super hunc panem. et super 
hune calicem. et fiat nobis. legitima eucharistia in trans- 
formatione corporis et sanguinis domini. ut quieumque 
et cotienscumque ex hoc panem. et ex hoc calice liba- 
berimus. sumamus nobis. monimentum, fidei. sincerem 
dilectiones. tranquilla. spem resurrectionis. adgue in-- 
mortalitatis aeterne in tuo filique tui. hac 


(4) 

pp. 26-27. Post SEcRETA. Addit etiam istud edictum. 
ut quotienseumque corpus ipsius sumeretur. et sanguis. 
commemoratio fierit dominicae passionis, quod nos facien- 
tis Jhesu Christi fili tui domini ac dei nostri. semper 
gloriam praedicamus, rogamus uti hoc sacrificlum tua 
benedictione benedicas et sancti spiritus rore perfundas, ut 
accipientibus universis. sit eucharia pura vera legitima, 
per Jhesum Christum filium tuum dominum ac deum 
nostrum qui vivet et regnat tecum cum spirito sancto in 
aeterna saecula saeculorum amen 


Missale Gothicum 
Muratori, Liturgia Romana Vetus, ii., cols. 517-658 
(1) 
Post Secreta (in Circumeisione Domini nostri Jesu 
Christi). Col. 534. 


336 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 
> 

"Haee nos, Domine, instituta et praecepta retinentes, 
supplieiter oramus: uti hoc sacrificium suscipere, et bene- 
dieere, et sanetifieare digneris: ut fiat nobis eucharistia 
legitima in tuo, Filiique tui nomine, et Spiritus Sancti, in 
transformationem corporis ac sanguinis Domini Dei nostri 
Jesu Christi Unigeniti tui. Per quem omnia creas, creata 
benedicis, benedicta sanctificas, et sanctificata largiris Deus, 
qui in trinitate perfecta vivis et regnas in saecula saecu- 
lorum. 

(2) 

Posr MxsrERIUM (in Adsumptione S. Mariae Matris 
Domini nostri). Col. 548. 

Descendat, Domine, in his sacrificiis tuae benedictionis 
coaeternus et cooperator Paraclytus Spiritus: ut oblatio- 
nem, quam tibi de tua terra fructificante porregimus, 
caelesti permuneratione, te sanctificante, sumamus: ut 
translata fruge in corpore, calice in cruore, proficiat meri- 
tis, quod obtulimus pro delietis. Praesta, omnipotens Deus, 
qui vivis et regnas in saec. 


(3) 

Posr MysTERIUM (in Cathedra Sancti Petri Apostoli). 
Cols. 565-566. 

Haee igitur praecepta sevantes, sacrosancta munera 
nostrae salutis offerimus, obsecrantes: ut immiscere digneris 
Spiritum tuum Sanctum supra haee solemnia: ut fiat nobis 
legitima eucharistia in tuo, Filiique tui nomine, et Spiritus 
Saneti, in transformatione corporis ac sanguinis Domini 
nostri Jesu Christi Unigeniti tui, edentibus nobis vitam 
aeternam, regnumque perpetuum conlatura bibituris. Per 
ipsum Dominum. 


(4) 
Missa (in Coena Domini). Cols. 577-578. 
Sacrosanctam, fratres dilectissimi, hodierna die incho- 
andae Paschae solemnitatem, ac salutiferam Dominicae 


APPENDIX 337 


immolationem effigiem in sacrificio spiritali, Christo 
offerente, transfusam, non jam in amaritudinem azymi, 
neque in fermento veteris malitiae celebrantes; sed in 
novam et sinceram consparsionem, immaculatas sacris 
altaribus hostias offerentes; omnipotentem Deum per 
Unigenitum Filium suum Dominum nostrum Jesum 
Christum deprecemur; qui haec in sacri corporis et san- 
guinis sui oblatione benedicere et sanctificare dignatus 
est; ita offerentium famulorum suorum munera oblata 
benedicat; et per inlustratione Spiritus Sancti, deferen- 
tibus nuntiis, odor suavitas ascendat. Per Dominum 
nostrum Jesum Christum Fil. 


(5) 

Post Sancrus (in Vigiliis Sanetae Paschae). Col. 594. 

Tuo jusso, Domine, condita sunt universa in caelo εἰ 
in terra, in mari et in omnibus abyssis. Tibi patriarchae, 
prophetae, apostoli, martyres, confessores, atque omnes 
sancti gratias agunt: quod et nos facientes, has hostias 
. Spiritales, et sincera libamina, ut libens exaudias, depre- 
camur, Te oramus: uti hoc sacrificium tua benedictione 
benedicas; et Spiritus Sancti tui rore perfundas: ut sit 
omnibus legitima eucharistia. Per Christum Dominum 
nostrum. Qui pridie. 


(6) 

Posr SECRETA (Missa Sancti Leudegarii Martyris). 
Col. 637. 

Haec facimus, Domine, passionem tuam commemo- 
rantes. Haec facimus, Pater Jesu Christe: qui nobis de 
lege veteri novam tradidisti. Concede nobis, intercedente 
Beato antistite Leudegario Martyre, cujus hodie annuae 
commemoratione celebramus: ut descendat hie benedic- 
tio tua super hune panem et calicem in transformatione 
Spiritus tui Saneti; uti haee benedicendo benedicas, 
sanetifieando sanctifices: ut quicunque ex utraque bene- 


338 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


dietione sumpserimus, aeternitatis praemium, et vitam 
consequi mereamur aeternam. Per. 


(7) 

Post MysTERIUM (Missa Dominicalis). Col. 651. 

Magnum hoc munus misericordiae est: qui nobis docuit 
redemptionis nostrae sacrificia celebrare, sieut obtulit 
Dominus noster Jesus Christus in terris. Per quem te, 
Pater omnipotens, deprecamur: ut supraposita altario 
tuo munera laetus aspicias: atque haec omnia obumbres 
Sancti Filii tui Spiritus: ut quod ex hac tua benedictione 
acceperimus, aeternitatis gloria consequamur. Per. 


(8) 

Post SECRETA (Missa Dominicalis). Col. 654. 

Memores gloriosissimi Domini passionis et ab inferis 
resurrectionis, offerimus tibi, Domine, hane immaculatam 
hostiam, rationalem hostiam, ineruentem hostiam, hune 
panem sanctum, et calicem salutarem, obsecrantes: ut 
infundere digneris Spiritum tuum Sanctum: edentibus 
nobis vitam aeternam, regnumque perpetuum conlatura 
potantibus. Per. 


Missale Gallicanum Vetus 


Muratori, Liturgia Romana Vetus, ii., col. 698-758 
(1) 

Post SECRETA (Missa S. Germani Episcopi). Col. 
699—700. 

Descendat, precamur omnipotens Deus, supplices haec, 
quae tibi offerimus Verbum tuum sanctum; descendat 
in[ae]stimabilis gloriae tuae Spiritus; descendat antiquae 
indulgentiae tuae donum: ut fiat oblatio nostra hostia 
spiritalis [in] odorem suavitatis accepta: etiam nos famulos 
tuos per sanguinem Christi tua manus dextera invicta 
custodiat. Per Dominum. 


APPENDIX 999 


(2) 

COLLEGTIO POST SECRETA (de Adventu Domini nostri 
Jesu Christi). Col. 705. 

Descendat, precamur, omnipotens Deus, super haec, 
quae tibi offerimus, Verbum tuum sanetum; descendat 
in[ae] stimabilis gloriae tuae Spiritus; descendat antiquae 
indulgentiae tuae donum: ut fiat oblatio haee hostia 
spiritalis in odorem suavitatis accepta: etiam nos famulos 
tuos per sanguinem Christi tua manus invicta custodiat. 
Per Dominum. ) 


(3) 
Post SECRETA (Missa in Symboli Traditione). Col. 719. 
Aspice sincero vultu pie miserator haec munera; qui 
semper es propensus ad dona: ut ipsa contemplatione 
oblata sanctifices naturali Majestate; qui perpetue sanc- 
tus es, et sancta largiris. Per Dominum nostrum Jesum 


Christum filium tuum. 
Cf. Missale Gothicum, Ibid., col. 577. 


Mozarabic Missal 


Migne, P. L. Ixxxv. 


Post Sanctus. Vere sanctus . . . ipse Dominus et 
redemptor eternus. Deinde dicat Presb. ín silentio junctis 
manibus inclinando se ante altare hanc Orationem. 

Adesto adesto Jesu bone pontifex in medio nostri: sieut 
fuisti in medio discipulorum tuorum: sanctifica hane 
oblationem: "kut sanctificata» sumamus per manus 
saneti angeli tui sancte Dominus ae redemptor eterne. 
Dominus noster Jesus Christus in qua nocte tradebatur 
accepit panem: et gratias agens benedixit ac fregit : 
deditque discipulis suis dicens. Accipite et manducate. 
Hoe: est: corpus: meum: quod: pro: vobis: tradetur. 
Hic elevetur corpus. Quotiescumque manducaveritis: 
hoc facite in meam»Rcommemorationem. Similiter et 


340 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


calicem postquam cenavit dicens. Hie»Kest: calix: novi: 
testamenti: in: meo: sanguine: qui: pro: vobis: et: 
pro: multis: effundetur: in: remissionem: peccatorum. 
Hic elevetur calix coopertus cum filiola. Quotiescumque 
biberitis hoc facite in meam commemorationem. Et 
cum perventum fuerit ubi dicit. In meam commemora- 
tionem. Dicat presb. alta voce omnibus diebus preter 
festivis: pari modo ubi dicit. In claritatem de celis. Et 
qualibet vice respondeat Chorus. Amen. Quotiescumque 
manducaveritis panem hune et calicem istum biberitis: 
mortem Domini annunciabitis donee veniet. In clari- 
tatem»Rde celis. R. Chorus. Amen. 


Dicat Presb. 

Post PRIDIE. Oratio... R. Amen. Postea dicat 
presb. 

Te prestante sancte Domine: quia tu hec omnia nobis 
indignis servis tuis: valde bona creas: sancti ficas: 
vivificas + benedi-kcis + ac prestas nobis: ut sit benedicta 


a te Deo nostro in secula seculorum. R. Chorus. Amen. 
Col. 116-117. 


Post PRIDIE. (In Saneti Andree Apostoli.) 

Credimus pariter et fatemur summe ac credulitatis 
impulsu tacere non sinimur: te Deum Redemptorem: 
quem nostrum pro nobis miseris in cruce fuisse suspensum. 
Descendisse etiam in infernum: ut nos resurgens elevares 
ad celos. Reliquisse etiam nobis exemplum: ut te se- 
quentes Dominum: passiones tolleremus in mundum. 
quo expleto beatus Andreas discipulus tuus ac martyr 
et apostolus informatus: crucis pro te supplicium devota 
mente portavit. Fac nos quesumus Domine ipso inter- 
cedente hoc tui corporis sanguinisque mysterium Spiritus 
tul rore sanctificatum: ad nostrarum remedium sumere 
animarum. 'R. Amen. — Col. 162. 


APPENDIX 941 


Post Prıpıe. (In Navitate Domini Nostri Jesu 
Christi.) 

Hec Domine dona tua et precepta servantes: in altare 
tuum panis ac vini holocausta proponimus. Rogantes 
profussisimam tue misericordie pietatem: ut in eodem 
Spiritu quo te in carne virginitas incorrupta concepit: 
has hostias Trinitas indivisa sanctificet: ut cum a nobis 
fuerit non minori trepidatione quam veneratione per- 
cepta: quiequid contra animam male vivit intereat: 
quiequid interierat nullatenus reviviscat. R. Amen. 
— Col. 189. 


N.B. This same Post Pridie is also assigned to St. Matthias, to 
St. Matthew, and to the Common of One Martyr (cols. 727, 864, 
952), without essential variation. These three last omit dona et 
in the opening clause, and all that follows after sanctificet, and 
insert between proponimus and rogantes the clause: et in commemo- 
rationem sancti tui (Mathie Apostoli, or Matthei Apostoli εἰ Evan- 
geliste, or N. respectively) suscepta populi tui per has oblationes te 
jubente vota deferimus mom nostris meritis: sed obsequio suscepti 
officii. 

Post PRrIDIE ORATIO. (In Primo Dominico post Oc- 
tavam Epiphanie Domini.) 

Domine sacrificia dependentes supplices flagitamus: 
ut effundas in his hostiis Saneti tui Spiritus largitatem. 
Ut dum a te benedicta sumimus: omni nos benedictione 
refectos: et a criminum vineulis liberatos: omnibus 
modis gaudeamus. R. Amen. Te prestante sancte Do- 
mine: per quem tu hec omnia nobis indignis, ete. — Col. 
245. 


Post Pripre. (In Secundo Dominico post Octavas 
Epiphanie.) 

Vitam nostram Domine unigeniti tui mortem votiva 
confessione promerentes: in resurrectionem ejus et as- 
censionem in celis vita indubitata fatemur: vetus quoque 
rursus: ac pro meritis singulos judieaturus reatu licet 
trepidi: sed tua freti misericordia prestolamur. Ob hoc 


342 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ergo quesumus famulantes: ut oblationem hane Spiritus 
tul permixtione sanctifices: et corporis ac sanguinis 
Domini nostri Jesu Christi plena transformatione confor- 
mes. Ut hostia qua nos redemptos esse meminimus: 
mundari a sordibus facinorum mereamur: nec nos trans- 
fixus vulnere: a tua reprobes curatione. Medicus enim 
es: egri sumus.  Misericors es: nos miseri. Ergo qui 
tibl nostra non abscondimus vulnera quibus placaris: 
sana nos sacrificio. R. Amen. Presta Pater ingenite 
per unigenitum tuum Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum: 
per quem tu hee omnia nobis indignis servis, etc. — Cols. 
250, 251. 


Post PRIDIE. Oratio. (In Sexto Dominico post Oc- 
tavas Epiphanie Domini.) S 

Credentes Domine universa mirabilia Domini nostri 
Jesu Christi fili tui: atque. incarnationis ejus: et 
divinitatis potentiam confitentes in tuis laudibus exul- 
tamus tibique sacrificium laudis offerimus. | Rogamus 
clementiam tuam summa Trinitas Deus et infinita majes- 
tas: ut hee oblatio quam in sancto altario tuo deferimus, 
pro nostrorum expiatione facinorum: sit oculis tuis 
placita: sit semper accepta: simulque efficiatur illo seculo 
superveniente septiformi Spiritu benedicta quo ubique 
Deus veraciter manifestetur in eo. ‚Ut te hane hostiam 
benedicente: si qui ex ea libaverint te largiente: et in 
hoe seculo percipiant medicinam et in futuro consequan- 
tur vite eterne coronam. K. Amen. — Cols. 272, 273. 


Post PRIDIE. (Dominico Primo in Quadragesima.) 

Deus qui in corde mulieris Samaritane Spiritum tue 
sanctificationis dedisti: quo te crederet: quo te inspirata 
sentiret: quo etiam posset tue majestatis potentiam 
fidei intentione narrare. Emitte Spiritum tuum de 
sanetis celis tuis: quo sanctificentur oblata: suscipiantur 
vota: expientur delicta: et cunctis ex hoc sumentibus 


APPENDIX 343 


donetur eriminis indulgentia: atque eterne promissionis 
gaudia sempiterna. R. Amen. — Col. 304. 


Post PRrIDIE. (In Quinto Dominico Quadragesime.) 

Recitatis Domine unigeniti tui sacramentorum precep- 
tis: simulque preclare passionis et resurrectionis et in celos 
ascensionis memoriam facientes majestatem tuam sup- 
plices rogamus ac petimus. Ut in his sacrificiis bene- 
dietionum tuarum plenitudo descendat: et infundas in 
eis imbrem Spiritus tui Sancti de celis. Ut fiat hoc sacri- 
ficium secundum ordinem Melchisedech: fiat hoc sacrifi- 
cium secundum ordinem Patriarcharum et Prophetarum 
tuorum. Ut quod ab illis tipice facientibus unigeniti 
filii tui significantibus adventum: tua majestas acceptare 
dignata est: sie hoc sacrificium respicere et sanctificare 
digneris: quod est! verum corpus et sanguis Domini 
nostri Jesu Christi fili tui: qui pro nobis omnibus factus 
est Sacerdos et hostia. Hanc itaque hostiam tu piissime 
Pater de tue claritatis respectu sanctifica: ut sumentibus 
eam: et hie delictorum veniam: et eternam in celis con- 
feras vitam. R. Amen. — Col. 376. 


Post PRIDIE. (In Die Resurrectionis Domini.) 

Precamur nunc Domine sancte Pater eterne omnipotens 
Deus: ut quemadmodum Dominus noster Jesus Christus 
filius tuus illa ineffabilium gratiarum actione semetipsum 
tibi pro nobis offerens: mortem nostram suscepturus 
auditus est: ita nunc et nos qui ipsum et vitam ejus 
querimus exequendo ministerialiter: que instituit audia- 


! Dr. Neale regarded quod est as an alteration from quod sit or 
some similar phrase, such as quod fiat. See his Essays on Litur- 
giology and Church History, second edition, London, 1867, p. 164; 
and also his Earnest Plea for the Retention of the Scotch Liturgy, 
London, 1862, p. 12. Cf. Scudamore,, Notitia Eucharistica (sec- 
ond edition), London, 1876, p. 589, note 4; pp. 649-650; pp. 
651-652. But, may this not be simply an explanation of that 
wherein the sanctification requested for the elements consists? 
* That is, [to be] the true Body," etc. 


344 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


mus. Ut hie tibi panis cum hoc calice-oblatus in filii tur 
corpus et sanguinem te benedicente ditescat. Ας largo 
oris tui perfusus Spiritu: indulgentiam nobis omnium 
peccatorum largiatur et gratiam: et conlate a se salutis 
dono: donec in semetipso perficiat: custodiam adhibeat 
indefessam. R. Amen. — Cols. 485, 486. 


Post PRIDIE. (Secunda Feria Pasche ad Missam.) 

- Hoe agentes apud te Pater sancte redemptricem nos- 
tram unigeniti tui mortem: sicut ipse precepit usque in 
adventum ipsius nuntiamus. Nos eum pro nobis annun- 
tiamus mortuum esse: tu commoriendi tribue dignitatem. 
Nos eum resurrexisse credimus: tu presta ut quotidianis 
nostris liberemur a lapsibus. Nos eum credimus et annun- 
tiamus ad judieium esse venturum: tu presta talem con- 
versationem ut ejus terriblem adventum  propicium 
mereamur habere. Hane quoque oblationem ut acceptam 
habeas et benedicas supplices exoramus: sicut accepta 
habuisti munera Abel pueri tui justi: et sacrificium pa- 
triarche nostri Abrahe: et quod obtulit Summus Sacerdos 
tuus Melchisedech. Descendat hie queso invisibiliter 
benedictio tua sieut quondam in patrum hostiis descen- 
debat. Ascendat odor suavitatis in conspectu divine 
majestatis tue: ex hoc sublimi altario tuo per manus 
Angeli tui: et deferatur in ista solennia Spiritus tuus 
Sanctus qui tam adstantis quam offerentis populi: et 
oblata pariter et vota sanctificet. Ut quieumque ex 
hoe corpore libaverimus sumamus nobis medelam anime: 
ad sananda cordium vulnera: ad expellendas de cogi- 
tationibus cordis nostri omnes imagines vanitatis. Ad 
eradicanda funditus odia vel vicia terrena: ad plantan- 
dam perpetuam charitatem: que operit multitudinem 
peccatorum. Ut vere hie sanguis sacer filii tui Domini 
nostri ita peccata nostra diluat potatus: sicut quondam 
nos redemit effusus. R. Amen. — Cols. 491, 492. 


N.B. Br. Mus. Add. MS. 30,846, fol. 7 omits munera Abel 
pueri tui justi, and inserts before descendebat, visibiliter. 


APPENDIX 345 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. (In Octava Pasche ad Missam.) 

Facimus Domine commemorationem Domini nostri 
Jesu Christi filii tui: qui nos morte sua redemit: et Resur- 
rectione erexit. Quique hodie ad discipulos januis clausis 
intravit: et uni eorum hesitanti: corporea attrectatione 
se palpandum exhibuit. Unde per ipsum te Deus Pater 
exposcimus: ut illo Spiritu hec oblata sanctifices: quo 
olim in discipulos insufflasti eredentes. Sieque nos par- 
ticipatione hostie hujus percipiamus meritum sancti- 
tatis: sicut ili te insufflante adepti sunt verbum predi- 
eationis. A. Amen. — Col. 574. 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. (In Ascensione Domini.) 

Indicavimus plane: nec unquam tacebimus passum 
te Christe pro redemptione miserorum: resurrexisse pro 
salute fidelium: celos ascendisse pro virtute meritorum: 
venturum te esse Judicem mortuorum atque viventium. 
Quod scientes Domine: ut nobis dies illa terribilis ali- 
quantulum ex tua propitiatione mitior adveniat: hec 
munera offerimus. Que ut nobis in salutem percepta 
contingant: visitet ea Spiritus tuus Sanctus qui in simili- 
tudinem flamme manus [= Manue] dona suscepit.  Visi- 
tet et vivificet ea Spiritus tuus Sanctus: qui per vaporem 
incendii Helie prophete holocaustum adsumpsit.  Visitet 
et vivificet ea Spiritus tuus Sanctus: qui ignearum divi- 
sione linguarum in Apostolorum tuorum cordibus com- 
meavit. Ut recepta in visceribus nostris: et presentem 
nobis: et eternam prestent salutem. R. Chorus. Amen. 
— Cols. 604, 605. 


N.B. Br. Mus. Add. MS. 30, 844, fol. 137 v. adds supplices depre- 
camur after contingant. 

N.B. Br. Mus. Add. MS. 30,846 contains this Post Pridie twice, 
fol. 108 v/109 v and fol. 119 v/120 v. In the first instance it 
ends with contingant (the rest being understood). In the second 
instance it is given entire, rogamus being added between contingant 
and visitet. 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. (In Dominico post Ascen- 
sionem Domini.) 


346 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Contueri tuam Christe cupientes presentiam: qui 
humana non deserens: appetisti superna: petimus et 
rogamus: ut qui pignus assumpte carnis intulisti in celos: 
consolationem nobis Sancti Spiritus largiaris. Cujus 
nune presentia et apposita hec tibi oblata sanctifices: 
et nostrorum cordium arcana perlustres. R. Amen.— 
Col. 608. 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. (In Vigilia Pentecostes.) 

Spiritus Sancte qui a Patre et Filio procedis: his pro- 
picius inlabere holocaustis. Quo qui a Patre es repro- 
missus: sanctificationem humanis exhibeas presentatus: 
repleasque sponsionis mercede: quos te promissum in- 
spicis expectare. R. Amen. — Col. 612. 


N.B. Br. Mus. Add. MS. 30,846, fol. 161 r/ 163 r. adds cordibus 
after humanis. 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. (In Die Sancto Pentecostes.) 

Suscipe quesumus Spiritus Sancte omnipotens Deus 
sacrificia te auctore instituente decreta: qui inlibate 
Virginis in utero quondam membra: in qua Verbum 
caro fieret: quibus hoc rite sacrificium competeret im- 
maculata formasti. In cujus hee similitudinem corporis 
et sanguinis munera ingerimus: et ut plenitudinem debite 
sanctificationis te deificante obtineant supplicamus. | Quia 
tu vere ille ignis es: qui patrum nostrorum acceptans 
sacrificia divinitus consumpsisti. Quemadmodum Helie 
quoque victimam aquis circumfluentibus natitatem cum 
lapidibus et lignis exurens: etiam madefacti pulveris 
rivulos calore inconsummabili arefactos inextimabiliter 
absumendo finisti. Simili nune quesumus has hostias 
dignatione suscipias: divinitatis tue igne salvifico omnium 
pectorum nostrorum affectionem exurens: atque ad per- 
cipiendam celestis cibi potusque substantiam vivificans 
eorda mortalium: in et custodiam nostri deputans sane- 
torum multitudinem Angelorum: nunquam nos eorum 
privari consortio patiaris. R. Amen. — Col. 620. 


APPENDIX 347 


Post Priıpıe. ORATIO. (In festo Sancte Marciane 
Virginis et Martyris.) 

Te omnipotens Deus petimus et rogamus: ut hanc 
oblationem quam tibi fideli et humili devotione offerimus: 
suscipere digneris propicius: et nostre servitutis libamina 
ipse tibi facias acceptabilia. Ut accepta per mysterium 
Sancti Spiritus: nobis sanctificata tribuas postulatione 
nostre salutis: et in odorem suavitatis accipias. R. 
Amen. — Col. 778. 


N.B. This same Post Pridie is also found in the mass of 
St. Rufina (col. 787) with slight differences: e.g., ministerium 
for mysterium, and postulationem for postulatione. 


Post PRIDIE. (Insanete Christine Virginis et Martyris.) 

Hec igitur precepta servantes: sacrosancta munera 
nostre salutis offerimus: obsecrantes te clementissime 
omnipotens Deus: ut infundere digneris Spiritum tuum 
Sanetum super hec libamina: ut fiat nobis legitima 
Eucharistia: in te filiique tui nomine: et Spiritus Sancti 
benedieta: in transformatione ejusdem corporis Domini 
nostri Jesu Christi filii tui edentibus nobis in vitam eter- 
nam regnumque perpetuum. R. Amen. — Col. 794. 


Post PRIDIE. (Infesto Apostolorum Symonis et Jude.) 

Amator et conservator Sanctorum omnipotens Pater: 
ecce super altare tuum in honorem Sanctorum apostolorum 
Simonis et Jude: panis ae vini ab unigenito tuo Domino 
nostro holocausta instituta proponimus: eaque Sancti 
Spiritus rore perfunde deposcimus. Dignetur quesumus 
super illa inlabi Spiritus Sanctus: dignetur illa sanctifieata 
suscipere illorum institutor: tuus unigenitus fihus. Ut. 
quotquot ex illis libaverimus: non pro presumptione 
sustineamus vindietam, sed pro voto perfrui mereamur 
corona. Qualiter Christi Domini nostri filii tui perceptis 
sacrificiis communicantes: ad conspectum glorie tue per- 
veniamus indemnes. R. Amen. — Col. 891. 


348 ΤΗΕ ΟΟΝΡΘΕΟΒΑΤΙΟΝ OF THE EUCHARIST 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. (In Festo Corporis Domini 
nostri Jesu Christi.) 

Complentes igitur atque servantes preceptum Uni- 
geniti tui: precamur omnipotens Pater: ut his creaturis 
superpositis altario tuo Spiritum sanctificationis infundas: 
ut per transfusionem celestis atque invisibilis Sacramenti 
panis: hie transmutatus in carnem: et calix transfor- 
matus in sanguinem: sit offerentibus gratia: sumentibus 
medicina. R. Amen. — Col. 627. 


N.B. The Post Pridie In Dominico ante Jejunium Kalendarum 
Novembrium (col. 650) is the same, except that it reads precepta 
instead of preceptum, and munus infundas instead of spiritum 
infundas. 


Post PRIDIE. Oratio. (In Sancte Eulalie Virginis et 
Martyris Barchinonensis.) 

Omnipotens Deus: qui inlibatum Virginis corpus in- 
tactum servas a flammis: emitte in his hostiis Spiritum 
sanctitatis. Qui et oblata sanctificet: et oblatores 
propiciabili respectu perlustret. A. Amen. — Col. 713.: 


Post ΡΗΙΡΙΕ. (In festo Sanctorum Fructuosi: A gurii : 
et Eulogii Martyrum et ejus comitum.) 

Omnipotens Deus. . . . Tu hec oblata tibi libamina 
calore Saneti Spiritus perflans: benedicenda assume: 
horumque participatione fac nos charitate fervere: de- 
lietisque frigescere. Quo in divino amore succenst: sit in 
nobis ignis: qui exurat peccata: non qui augeat viciorum 
carnalium incentiva. R. Amen. — Col. 717. 


Post PRIDIE. Oratio. (In festo SS. Torquati et 
Comitum ejus Episcoporum.) 

Deus omnipotens qui ad salvandum partis nostre con- 
ventum: septem misisti specula Sacerdotum: eisdem 
intercedentibus quorum sacratissime memorie tuo recitan- 
tur altario: Spiritum Sanetum de tuis sedibus mitte. 
Quo et oblatis hostiis sanetificationem: et nostris doc- 


APPENDIX 349 


toribus profusissimam impercias sanctitatem. R. Amen. 
— Col. 738. 

N.B. Br. Mus. Add. MS. 30,846, fol. 87 r reads nostris peccato- 
ribus. 

Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. (In festo Sancti Sperati: et 
ejus comitum.) 

Mirabilem te in Sanctis tuis Domine confitentes: ac 
resurrectionis Domini nostri Jesu Christi gloriam predi- 
cantes: per eorum te deprecamur plissimas preces: quos 
in agone certaminis reddidisti vietores: ut de illo invisi- 
bili ae profluo fonte: quo illi vitam eternam potare non 
cessant: Spiritum sanctificationis emittas: qui oblatum 
hoc sacrifieium celesti rore pinguescere faciat. Quod 
dum a te Domine sumpserimus sanetificatum: tuoque 
munere fuerit visceribus nostris infusum: omni nos bene- 
dictione refectos: atque ab omni onere peccatorum 
absolutos: nos semper sentiamus et liberos. R. Amen. 
— Col. 911. 


Post PRIDIE. Onarro. (Missa Plurimarum Virginum.) 

Sacrarum Virginum excolentes solennia: hee tibi Dom- 
ine offerimus holocausta: tuam postulantes clementiam. 
Ut qui septus Virginum choris: inter lilia pasceris: 
[su]per hec libamina: Spiritum tue dirigas sanctitatis. 
Ut quod a nobis ob honorem Virginum tuarum N. et N. 
acceperis: hoc nobis sumendum ad nostrorum criminum 
indulgentiam largiaris. R. Amen. — Col. 981: 


Post PrIDIE. ΟΠΑΤΙΟ. (Missa de uno Defuncto.) 

Obtemperantes talibus institutis: te poscimus omnipo- 
tens Pater: ut ad sanctificationem hujus hostie spiritualis 
Spiritum Sanctum: quem filius tuus repromisit: immit- 
tas: ut per eum sanctificati: unius divinitatis mereamur 
percipere trinitatem: ut cum justus advenerit judex: 
eos in nobis fructus: quibus gloria preparatur: inveniat. 
R. Amen. — Col. 1025 (2 Liber Ordinum, col. 430, with 
slight variations). 


350 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF ΤΗΕ EUCHARIST 


Post Sawcrus. (In Tertio Dominico post Pente- 
costen.) 

Vere sanctus: vere benedictus Dominus noster Jesus 
Christus filius tuus. In cujus nomine etiam tibi Domine 
hec sacra libamus: orantes: ut que offerimus libens 
suscipias: et Spiritus tui Sancti infusione benedicas. 
Deus Dominus ac redemptor eternus. 

"Posr PRIDIE. ORATIO. 

Benedic Domine huie hostie in honorem tui nominis 
tibi oblate: et sumentium ex ea sanctifica mentem: et 
purifica voluntatem. R. Amen. — Col. 633. 


INLATIO. (In Festo Sanctorum Fausti, Januari, et 
Marcialis.) 


. . . Dignum majestati tue laudis sacrificium offerentes : 
sanetificetur quesumus holocaustum tuo altario imposi- 
tum: per signum filii tui: per descensum Spiritus Sancti: 
per presentiam Angeli! deputati. Sit tibi acceptum. 
Sit tibi gratum. Sit tibi sanctum. Venerabile gloriosum 
et pingue et vivum vitale et igneum. Unicuique nostrum 
eum degustaverimus: carbo igneus efficiatur: quem 
vidit Esayas propheta Angelica manu: forcipe abstractum 
ab ara: labia nostra mundet: immunda polluta peccatis 
nostra tibi sanctificet corda. . . . 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. 

Indivisa Trinitas et una majestas: que predietorum 
Martyrum hodie in passione laudaris: et presentium 
sacrificiorum litatione placanda ascisceris: te vocibus: 
votis: et orationibus imploramus: ut que illis inexpug- 
nabilem tribuisti devicto hoste victoriam: hee nostra 
sanctifices propiciata oblata. R. Chorus. Amen. — Cols. 
873, 874. 


Post PRrIDIE. Oratio. (Nativitas Sancte Johannis 
Baptiste.) 


! Cf. Canon Missae, TI, p. 361. 


APPENDIX 951 


Convaluisti: Domine Jesu Christe in gratia: et in- 
eredulis gentibus sedula testatione claruisti. 
Oramus ergo te Domine ut hanc oblationem nostram: 
respicere et benedicere digneris: sicut benedicere digna- 
tus es munus Abel justi pueri tui.! AR. Amen. Cols. 761, 
702. 

N.B. Is this complete? Compare the Post Pridie of Easter 
Monday, col. 491. (See above, p. 344.) 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. (In Quinto Dominico Pasche.) 

Confitemur Domine confitemur: et credimus pro nostro 
scelere te corporaliter mortis subiisse supplicium: et pro 
omnium salute prostrato mortis interitu triumphantibus 
Angelis celestem Patris: ex qua veneras: ad mansionem 
reversum. Pro quo te Deus omnipotens rogamus et 
petimus: ut oblata in conspectu tuo nostre servitutis 
libamina: ipse tibi acceptabilia facias: et accepta dis- 
currente sancto Angelo tuo ? nobis sanctificata distribuas: 
ut dum corda nostra corporis et sanguinis filii tui Domini 
nostri commixtione purificas: petitiones nostras in odorem 
suavitatis acciplas. AR. Amen. Cols. 590, 591. 


InLATIO. (Item Missam pro se ipso sacerdote.) 
. .. Placita tibi sunt hee sacrificia; eaque manu 
Angeli tui:? ipse sanctifica. 


Post SANCTUS. 

. . . Infusione Saneti Spiritus tui repleantur munera 
hujus sacrificii. Tu es Deus meus salvator: et redemptor 
eterne. 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. 

Hec hostia panis ac vini: que a me indigno tuo sunt 
imposita altario: regalibus sedibus tuis eterne omni- 
potens Deus intuere vultu placabili: et benedic per 
manus Angeli gloriosi? . . . Ut sanatus per gratiam 


Cf. Canon Missae, 9 H, pp. 360-361. 
? Cf. Canon Missae, * I, p. 361. 


352 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


tuam merear tibi laudes persolvere placitas. R. Amen. 
Cols. 989, 990. 


N.B. Liber Ordinum (cols. 278, 279) gives these with but 
slight variation. 


Post PRIDIE. OrATIo. (Missa de omnibus Fidelibus 
Defunctis.) 

Credimus te Domine Jesu Christe omnium esse virtutum : 
rogamus te Deus piissime: ut precem nostram jubeas 
exaudiri propieius: et omnibus in te credentibus peccata 
jubeas dimitti: et hujus sacrifieii munera per manus 
Angeli tui! jubeas sanctificari. Defunctorum quoque 
famulorum tuorum N. et N. qui in te credentes ab hac 
necesserunt luce: loeum tribue electorum in regione 
vivorum. R. Amen. Col 1031 (=Liber Ordinum, 
col. 428, with slight variations). 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. (In Sexto Dominico Pasche.) 

Hec est pia et salutaris hostia Deus Pater: qua tibi 
reconciliatus est mundus “Hoc est corpus illud: quod 
pependit in eruce. Hic etiam sanguis: qui sacro profluxit 
ex latere? Pietati tue proinde gratias agentes: ex hoc 
quod nos filii tui morte redemeris: et Resurrectione salva- 
veris: acclives mente te Dominum pietatis oramus: ut 
hec libamina: Spiritus tui saneti benedictione respergens: 
sumentium visceribus sanctificationem accommodes. Quo 
purificati a eriminum labe plenissime joeundemur in hoc 
Resurrectionis Dominice die. R. Amen. Col. 597. 


Posr PripIE. (Feria Tertia post Pascha.) 
Paschalium gaudiorum deliciis delectati: offerimus tibi 
Domine sanete Pater 2 corpus et sanguinem fili tui:? 


1 Cf. Canon Missae, J I., p. 361. 

?-? These expressions seem to suggest the modern Roman theory 
of consecration. They may be alterations or additions to the 
earlier text (cf. p. 343, note 1). On the other hand, they may be 
simply rhetorical eguivalents of the phrase imago et similitudo cor- 
poris et sanguinis of a Post Pridie in the Liber Ordinum (cols. 321— 
322), given below, p. 357. 


APPENDIX 353 


guod ipse placatus benedicendum assumens: largiaris 
nobis guesumus cum regeneratis infantibus conscientie 
puritatem ita habere dum vivimus: ut ex hoc post vite 
hujus excursum cum eisdem a te pariter coronemur. 
quo omnes qui nune tue resurrectionis vietorias ovando 
excolimus: in resurrectionis ultimo die: in hujus hostie 
litatione salvemur. R. Amen. Col. 497. 


Post Sanctus. (Feria Quarta Pasche.) 

. .. Et tu tanto noti splendoris candore perfusus: 
sacrificia per te instituta sanctifiea. Non invocantis 
merito: sed instituentis magisterio vel exemplo. 


Post PRIDIE. ORATIO. 

Resurgente Christo resolutis inferni doloribus: etiam 
nos Deus Pater omnipotens solutis peecatorum delecta- 
tionibus et resurgere concede propicius: ut mortificationis 
nostre sacrificium tibi principaliter offeramus. Reconciliet 
te quesumus Domine pro peccatoribus sanguis justi et 
humilitas Domini nostri. 1 Hec est hostia que pependit in 
ligno. Heec est caro que surrexit de sepulero.! Quod pro 
nobis obtulit Sacerdos noster: in veritate hoc conferimus 
in panis et vini suavitate. Cognosce precamur omnipotens 
Deus vietimam: qua intercedente placatus es: et suscipe 
in adoptionem: quibus Pater per gratiam facetus es. Sie 
quoque Domine sanctificatio et benedictio tua: defensio 
est et mundatio nostra. Ut et peccatorum nobis veniam 
tribuas: et preceptis tuis semper obedientes efficias. 
R. Amen. Cols. 501, 502. 


Post PRIDIE. Oratio. (Missa votiva singularis.) 

Recolentes Domine sancte Pater eterne omnipotens 
Deus: preceptis tuis precamur inclitam tue clementie 
majestatem: et mysterium passionis Jesu Christi filii tui 
Domini nostri: ut !hic panis: quem lignum crucis: coxit: 
et hie calix: quem torcular passionis expressit:' bene- 


"πὶ Cf. second note on preceding page. 


354 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


dictionem tue divinitatis accipiant: veramque salutem 
sumentibus prestent: ut quicumque exinde sumpserimus : 
specialem gratiam consequi mereamur. R. Amen. Col. 
993. 


N.B. Liber Ordinum (cols. 317-318) inserts per before myste- 


rium. 


Post ῬΗΙΡΙΗ. (In festo Inventionis Sancte Crucis.) 

Meminimus quidem omnipotens Pater: et fideli mente 
retinemus Domini nostri Jesu Christi fili tui: traditum 
nobis navitatis ejus innenarrabile sacramentum:  pre- 
clarum devicta per Crucem morte triumphum: atque 
gloriosum ad celos post Crucis passionem ascensum. 
Credimus etiam immensum et incomprehensibile con- 
sempiternum tecum ejus et consubstantiale principium : 
ipsum quoque venturum confitemur judicem mortuorum 
atque viventium. Unde quesumus tremende clementis- 
sime Pater: ut hane hostiam in similitudinem corporis 
et sanguinis ejus tibi oblatam: per signum Crucis sancti- 
fices: et benedicas: in signum Crucis suscipias et adsumas: 
nobisque famulis tuis ejusdem Crucis vexillo prenotatis: 
placatus distribuas: et benignus impercias. R. Amen. 
Col. 744. 


N.B. Br. Mus. Add. MS. 30,846, fol. 102 v-103 v, omits in 
signum Crucis suscipias. > 


The Mozarabic Liber Ordinum 


Edited from eleventh century MSS. by Dom M. Férotin. Paris, 1904 
Missa OMNIMODA. (Col. 233 seq.) 


Posr SANCTUS 
Pro sexta exhinc accedit confirmatio sacramenti, ut oblatio, 
que Deo offertur, sanctificata per Spiritum Sanctum, Christa 
corpori ac sanguini conjormetur. 
Vere sanctus, vere benedictus es tu, Filius Dei vivi. . . . 
Christe Domine ac redemtor eterne. 


APPENDIX 355 


MISSA SECRETA. 

Dominus noster Ihesus Christus, in qua nocte tradebatur 
aecepit panem et benedixit, et gratias egit ac fregit; 
deditque discipulis suis, dicens: Accipite et manducate: 
Hoc est corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur. Hoc 
facite in meam commemorationem. 

Similiter et calicem, postquam cenavit, dicens: Hic 
calix novum testamentum est, quod pro multis effundetur 
in remissione peecatorum. Et hoc facite quotienscumque 
biberitis, in meam commemor»Ktionem. Quotienscum- 
que manducaveritis panem hunc et calicem istum bibe- 
ritis, mortem Domini annuntiabitis donee veniat in cla- 
ritwkte de celis. 

Resp: Sie credimus, Domine Ihesu. 


Post PRIDIE 
Sanctifica, Domine, hee tibi sacrificia delibata, et su- 
mentium corda pietate solita a malis omnibus placatus 
emunda: quo mereamur tibi Domino conplacere, et in- 
cessabiliter sine offensione servire, et eterne vite heredi- 
tatem percipere sine fine. Amen. 
Te prestante, summe Deus, qui in Trinitate unus Deus 
gloriaris in secula seculorum. Amen. Cols. 237-239. 


Post PrIDIE. (Missa quam sacerdos pro se dicere 
debeat.) 

Memores sumus, eterne Deus, Pater omnipotens, 
gloriosissime passionis Domini nostri Ihesu Christi Filii 
tui, Resurrectionis etiam et ejus Ascensionis in celum. 
Petimus ergo Majestatem tuam, Domine, [ascendant] 
preces humilitatis nostre im conspectu clementie, et de- 
scendat super hunc panem et super hunc calicem plenitudo 
tue divinitatis. Descendat etiam, Domine, illa Sancti 
Spiritus tui inconprehensibilis majestas, sieut quondam 
in Patrum hostiis mirabiliter descendebat. Ac presta, 
Domine, ut hujus panis vinique substantia sanis custodiam 
adhibeat, languentibus medicinam infundat: discordanti- 


356 ΤΗΕ ΟΟΝΡΕΟΒΑΤΙΟΝ OF THE EUCHARIST 


bus insinuet reconciliationem, et supereminentem pacis 
augeat karitatem. Stultis infundat sapientiam, et sapi- 
entibus ne extollantur tribuat disciplinam; omnibusque 
ad te confugium facientibus plenissimam conferat sospi- 
tatem, et regni celestis plebem tuam faciat coheredem. 
Amen. Col. 265. 


Post PRIDIE. (Alia Missa guam sacerdos pro se dicere 
debeat.) 

Recolentes Domini nostri Ihesu Christi beatissimam 
passionem, necnon et ab inferis resurrectionem, sed et in 
celis ascensionem, offerimus preclare Majestati tue hostiam 
panis et vini: quam sereno vultu respicias et acceptam 
eam habere jubeas. Descendat itaque super hoc Spiritus 
tuus Sanetus altare, qui et munera populi tui sanctificet, 
et sumentium corda placatus emundet. Col. 269. 


Post PRIDIE. (Alia Missa singularis.) 

Te, omnipotens Deus, petimus et rogamus, ut obla- 
tionem hane, quam tibi offerimus pro famulo tuo, sus- 
cipere digneris propitius et ejus oblationes libamina ipse 
tibi facias acceptabilia: ut accepta per misterium Spiritus 
Saneti nobis sanctificata distribuas; ut, dum corda nostra 
Christi corporis sanctificatione purificas, et preces nostras 
exaudias, et holocaustum nostrum in odorem suavitatis 
accipias. Col. 311. 

N.B. This Post Pridie is found again in col. 329 with the follow- 
ing variations: propler famulos tuos referimus instead of offerimus 
pro famulo tuo; eorum libamina instead of ejus oblationes liba- 
mina; and ut per Spiritum tuum Sanctum sanctifices, et corda simul 


et corpora a peccatis expurges instead of ut accepta per misterium 
Spiritus Sancti nobis sanctificata distribuas. 


Post PRIDIE. (Alia Missa pluralis pro eis qui in natali- 
cia Martirum vota sua Domino offerunt.) 

Credimus, Domine sancte, Pater eterne, omnipotens 
Deus, Ihesum Christum Filium tuum Dominum nostrum 


' APPENDIX 397 


pro nostra salute incarnatum fuisse, et in substantia 
deitatis tibi semper esse equalem. Per quem, te petimus 
et rogamus, omnipotens Pater, ut accepta habeas et 
benedicere digneris hec munera et hec sacrificia inlibata, 
que tibi in primis offerimus pro tua saneta Eeclesia catho- 
lica, quam pacificare digneris per universum orbem ter- 
rarum in tua pace diffusam. Memorare etiam, quesumus 
Domine, servorum tuorum, qui tibi in honore sanctorum 
tuorum Jllorum reddunt vota sua Deo vivo ac vero, pro 
remissione suorum omnium delictorum. Quorum obla- 
tionem benedictam, ratam rationabilemque facere dig- 
neris; que est imago et similitudo corporis et sangui- 
nis Ihesu Christi Filii tui ac Redemtoris nostri. Cols. 
321-322. 


Post PrIDIE. (De Energumeno.) 

Offerimus tibi, Domine, has hostias corporis et san- 
guinis Filii tui Domini nostri, pro redemtione animarum 
nostrarum: rogantes misericordiam tuam, ut sanitatem 
inpertire digneris famulo tuo ΠΠ, quem egritudo horribilis 
coaretat et violentia spirituum inmundorum depopulat. 
Ob hoe, te Dominum omnium dominatorem supplices de- 
precamur, ut de sede Majestatis tue virtutem Sancti 
Spiritus summa velocitate transmittere digneris super hoc 
tibi preparatum altare, et hune panem et hunc calicem 
benedicendo»R benedicas»Fet sanctifieando sanctifices»k: 
quatenus ubi hec sacramenta ingressa fuerint, confestim 
omnis legio et venena seva demoniorum omnisgue exer- 
eitus diaboli et immundi spiritus temtamenta, tremens 
gemensque discedat et imperio tuo fugam arripiat; nullam 
deinceps potestatem accipientes in humano genere ingre- 
diendi, sed exteriores tenebras et penas quas merentur 
accipiant, Christum ubique pertimescant, signum vero 
sancte crucis metuant et pavescant. Col. 370. 


Post Sanctus. (Missa pro his qui causas Ecclesie exse- 
quuntur.) 


358 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Sanctus et sanctificatorum, Christe Deus et Domine, 
intende oblationi: et deprecationi nostre infusus, atgue 
sie panem hunc et calicem tuus benedicat consocius cum 
Patre Deo Spiritus Sanctus, ut sumentibus sie fortitudo 
permaneas adversus malignas obpugnationes, ut famulo 
tuo, pro quo offertur, proveniat ad glorie palmam et tri- 
umphi vietoriam. Col. 248. 


[Post ΡΗΙΡΙΕ], Feria quinta in Coena Domini. (Bibl. 
Ambrosiana A 24 bis inf., end of ninth or beginning of 
tenth century,) Ambrosian Sacramentary. 

Haec enim facimus, haec celebramus, tua Domine pre- 
cepta servantes et ad communionem inviolabilem hoc 
ipsum guod corpus Domini sumimus mortem dominicam 
nuntiamus. Tuum vero est omnipotens Pater, mittere 
nunc nobis unigenitum Filium tuum, guem non guaerenti- 
bus sponte misisti, qui cum sis ipse immensus et inaestima- 
bilis, Deum quoque ex te immensum et inaestimabilem 
genuisti, ut cujus passionem redemptionem humani ge- 
neris tribuisti, ejus nunc corpus tribuas ad salutem, per 
eundem Christum Dominum nostrum, per quem haec om- 
nia Domine semper bona creas»I sanctificas > vivificas + 
benedicis et nobis famulis tuis largiter praestas ad aug- 
mentum fidel et remissionem omnium peccatorum nos- 
trorum; et est tibi Deo Patri omnipotenti ex ipso et per 
ipsum et in ipso omnis honor, virtus, laus et gloria, im- 
perium, perpetuitas et potestas in unitate Spiritus Sancti 
per infinita saecula saeculorum. Amen. Ebner, p. 75. 


Text of the Canon Missae 


(Beginning with the prayer “ Te igitur"), from the Gelasian Saera- 
mentary (Vatican MS. Reginae, 316), as given by the Rev. H. A. 
Wilson, M. A., in his edition, Oxford, 1894, pp. 234-236. 

N.B. The arrangement into paragraphs, and the numbering 
of each word, is added here for purposes of reference. 


APPENDIX 359 


A. Te! igitur? clementissime? Pater“ per? lesum" 
Christum 7 Filium? tuum? Dominum !° nostrum " sup- 
plices ? rogamus " et“ petimus “ uti * accepta 17 habeas !* 


T 
et!? benedicas ? haec?' dona,” haec? munera,^* haec? 


sancta ? sacrificia ?? illibata.”®  Inprimis?? quae?? tibi + 
offerimus ? pro? ecclesia * tua *? sancta ?* catholica,?? 
quam ? pacificare,? custodire, adunare*' et” regere *? 
digneris ** toto ® orbe “ terrarum,“ una ** cum *? famulo 50 
tuo *' papa “2 nostro * Illo ** et ? antistite nostro ?? Illo 55 
episcopo.?? 

B. Memento, Domine? famulorum? famularumque “ 
tuarum, et * omnium 7 cireumadstantium,? quorum ? tibi '° 
fides ! cognita ? est, et“ nota » devotio, qui’ tibi 18 
offerunt 19 hoc ?? sacrificium ?' laudis ? pro ? se ?* suisque ?? 
omnibus, pro“ redemptione * animarum ?? suarum,?? 
pro * spe ? salutis * et ** incolumitatis ? suae,“ tibi 57 red- 
dunt ** vota * sua ** aeterno * Deo vero et * vivo.* 

C. Communicantes ! et? memoriam? venerantes * in- 
primis? gloriosae* semperque? virginis? Mariae? genitri- 
cis!" Dei! et ? Domini ? nostri 4 Iesu ® Christi,“ sed 17 
et 15 beatorum ? apostolorum “ ac? martyrum ? tuorum ? 
Petri et? Pauli,” Andreae?" Iacobi,?8 Ioannis,?® Thomae,?? 
Iacobi? Philippi,” Bartholomaei,? Matthaei,“ Simonis ® 
et?" Thaddaei," Lini? Cleti,2® Clementis,“ Xysti,“ Cor- 
nelii,” Cypriani,? Laurentii, Chrysogoni,“ Ioannis “ et 47 
Pauli, Cosmae? et““ Damiani?! [Dionysii? Rus- 
tic1,?] et ^* Eleutherii,® [Hilarii?* Martini?" Augustini? 
Gregorii?? Hieronymi,“ Benedicti 61] et * omnium ** sanc- 
torum " tuorum," quorum % meritis" precibusque 58 
concedas ut?“ in? omnibus ? protectionis ? tuae 7 
muniamur ? auxilio."“ Per?" Christum 78 Dominum 79 
nostrum.““ 

D. Hanc! igitur? oblationem ? servitutis * nostrae, sed“ 
et" cunctae ® familiae ? tuae,!? quaesumus," Domine,” ut 


360 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


placatus “ accipias, diesque nostros 17 in 15 tua !? pace 20 
disponas," atque? ab? aeterna ?* damnatione?" nos 
eripi?! et ?* in“? electorum ? tuorum *' iubeas ? grege * 
numerari.“ Per? Christum * Dominum 37 nostrum. 

E. Quam' oblationem? tuj; Deus, in? omnibus, 
quaesumus,’ benedictam,* adscriptam,’ ratam," rationa- 
bilem," acceptabilemque " facere ? digneris, ut ® nobis '* 
corpus " et? sanguis? fiat“ dilectissimi? Fili?" tui? 
Domini “ Dei ? nostri ?? Iesu "7 Christi.?® 

F. Qui’ pridie? quam? pateretur * accepit? panem? 
in 7 sanctas ? ac? venerabiles 19 manus " suas,” elevatis 15 
oculis * in 15 eaelum 15 ad 17 {615 Deum !? Patrem ?? suum #4 
omnipotentem," tibi? gratias? agens,? benedixit? 
fregit," dedit ?% discipulis?? suis,?? dicens?! Accipite ? 
et * manducate ὃν ex ® hoc * omnes. Hoc?“ est ?? enim 1? 
corpus“ meum." Simili ? modo,“ posteaquam * coena- 
tum “ est,*? accipiens * et “ hunc ? praeclarum °! ealicem “? 
in ® sanctas * ας venerabiles * manus?" suas? item 58 
tibi °° gratias“ agens,“ benedixit, dedit * discipulis ® 
suis,” dicens Accipite ** etw“ bibite ex“ ca 
omnes: hic"* est 5 enim ™ calix 7” sanguinis "* mei’? 
novi * et“! aeterni * testamenti, mysterium ““ fidei,* qui δν 
pro“ vobis ** et ® pro multis ?' effundetur ? in ® re- 
missionem “ peccatorum.” Haec ?* quotiescumque 57 fe- 
ceritis ** in *' mei 109 memoriam "“ facietis.!% 

G. Unde! et? memores? sumus,“ Domine? nos“ tui? 
servi? sed? et“ plebs tua ? sancta, Christi“ Filii 15 
tui'* Domini " Dei“ nostri '? tam ? beatae ?' passionis 22 
neenon ? et“ ab” inferis”* resurrectionis, sed 25 et ?? 
in 3° caelis“ gloriosae * ascensionis: * offerimus * prae- 
clarae * maiestati?* tuae?" de?“ tuis?? donis “ ac“! datis 
hostiam #® puram,“ hostiam 9 sanctam, hostiam 47 im- 
maculatam,** panem ** sanctum *? vitae°! aeternae δὲ et δὲ 
calicem °* salutis ? perpetuae. 

H. Supra ! quae? propitio? ac“ sereno? vultu “ respi- 
cere  digneris,“ et ὃ accepta 19 habere,! sicuti 12 accepta * 


APPENDIX 361 


habere ^ dignatus ^ es“ munera pueri 15. tui '? iusti 29 
Abel," et“ sacrificium ? patriarchae * nostri”? Abrahae, 
et?" quod 25 tibi 39 obtulit ? summus *' sacerdos ? tuus 33 
Melchisedech,“ sanctum ® sacrificium, ? immaculatam 57 
hostiam.?* 

I. Supplices ' te“ rogamus? omnipotens * Deus? iube ® 
haec " perferri ? per? manus "“ angeli “ tui 12 in ? sublime ^ 
altare ^ tuum * in“ conspectu 15 divinae !? maiestatis 20 
tuae," ut ? quotquot ? ex? hac” altaris?“ participatione?" 
sacrosanctum ** Filii?? tui?" corpus“ et? sanguinem 33 
sumpserimus “ omni ® benedictione ® caelesti 57 et ὅδ gra- 
tia repleamur.“ Per“ Christum “ Dominum “ nos- 
trum.“ Amen.“ 

J. [Memento ' etiam,? Domine? et“ eorum“ nomina,® 
qui’ nos“ praecesserunt ? cum "“ signo " fidei ? et ® dor- 
miunt “ in® somno * pacis." Ipsis,“ Domine,“ et 7° 
omnibus?' in ? Christo? quiescentibus “ locum” re- 
frigerii,° lucis?" et?® pacis?® ut“ indulgeas,! depre- 
camur." Per? Christum * Dominum ® nostrum.“] 

K. Nobis! quoque? peccatoribus, famulis * tuis? de“ 
multitudine 7 miserationum ® tuarum ? sperantibus," par- 
tem" aliquam ” societatis ? donare ^ digneris “ cum '* 
tuis " sanctis! apostolis? et?" martyribus," cum? 
Ioanne,5 Stephano, Matthia? Barnaba," Ignatio," 
Alexandro,?® Marcellino, Petro,“ Felicitate,! Perpetua,” 
Agathe Lucia, Agne,® Caecilia," Anastasia *7 et ὃν cum ὃν 
omnibus “ sanctis  tuis,? intra ? quorum ^ nos ? con- 
sortium “ non ‘47 aestimator “ meriti,*? sed?“ veniae,’' quae- 
sumus,? largitor? admitte»! Per? Christum ? Dom- 
inum ?? nostrum .?* 

L. Per! quem "haec * omnia, Domine,’ semper * bona" 
creas,® sanctificas,® vivificas,“ benedicis," et ? praestas ? 
nobis.4 Per“ ipsum," et 17 cum 15 ipso,'® et 29 in?! ipso ? 
est? tibi “ Deo? Patri?“ omnipotenti?" in?* unitate ?? 
Spiritus sancti? omnis? honor? et“ gloria? per? 
omnia 37 saecula ** saeculorum. Amen.“ 


362 THE CONSECRATION OF ΤΗΕ EUCHARIST 


N.B. In paragraph “I” (Supplices te) in the place of ex hac 
altaris participatione, (1) the Stowe Missal, the Missale Francorum, 
the Bergamo MS. and other old MSS. and early editions of the 
Ambrosian Rite, read ex hoc altari sanctificationis; (2) the Biasca 
MS. reads ex hac altaris sanctificatione. 


Ordo Romanus I 
MABILLON, Mus. Ital., ii., p. 12 


16. Tune finito offertorio, episcopi stant post Pontifi- 
cem, primus in medio, deinde per ordinem, et archidia- 
conus a dextris episcoporum, secundus diaconus a sinistris, 
et ceteri per ordinem disposita acie. Et subdiaconi re- 
gionarii, finito offertorio, vadunt retro altare aspicientes 
ad Pontificem, ut quando dixerit, Per omnia saecula, aut 
Dominus vobiscum, aut Sursum corda, aut Gratias, ipsi sint 
ad respondendum, stantes erecti, usque dum incipiunt 
dicere hymnum angelicum, id est Sanctus: quem dum ex- 
pleverint; surgit Pontifex solus, et intrat in Canonem. 
Episcopi vero, diaconi, subdiaconi, et presbyteri in pres- 
byterio permanent inclinati. Et cum dixerit, Nobis quo- 
que peccatoribus, surgunt subdiaconi: cum dixerit, Per 
quem haec omnia, Domine, surgit archidiaconus solus. 
Cum dixerit, Per ipsum et cum ipso, levat cum offertorio 
calicem per ansas, et tenens exaltat illum juxta Pontifi- 
cem. Pontifex autem tangit a latere calicem cum oblatis, 
dicens, Per ipsum et cum ipso, usque Per omnia saecula 
saeculorum amen. Et ponit oblationes in loco suo, et 
archidiaconus calicem juxta eas, dimisso offertorio in 
ansis ejusdem. 


Ordo Romanus II 
MABILLON, Mus. Ital., ii., pp. 47-48 


10. Tunc finito offertorio ordinantur presbyteri post 
Pontificem, et archidiaconus a dextris eorum; secundus 
diaconus a sinistris, et ceteri per ordinem disposita acie. 
Subdiaeoni etiam, finito offertorio, vadunt retro altare 
adspicientes ad Pontificem, stantes erecti usquedum dicta 


APPENDIX 363 


oratione super oblationes secreta, et Episcopo alta voce 
ineipiente Per omnia saecula saeculorum, post salutatio- 
nem et exhortationem, finita praefatione, incipiant dicere 
hymnum angelicum, id est Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, in 
quo bis repetitur Hosanna. Quae dum expleverint, surgit 
solus Pontifex, et tacite intrat in canonem, et diaconi et 
subdiaconi et presbyteri in presbyterio omnes permanent 
inclinati. In quo etiam canone sex ordines crucium 
observantur, quorum primus est, ubi dicitur, Ut accepta 
habeas, et benedicas haec dona, haec munera, haec sancta 
sacrificia illibata. Secundus quippe est, ubi dicitur, Quam 
oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quaesumus benedictam, 
adscriptam, ratam. "Tertius namque est crucis ordo, ubi 
narratur, Et accipiens panem in sanctas ac venerabiles 
manus suas, benedixit. Item, Tibi gratias agens, benedixit. 
Quartus, ubi subinfertur, Hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, 
hostiam immaculatam, panem sanctum vitae aeternae, et 
calicem salutis perpetuae. Quintus, ubi dicitur, Per quem 
haec omnia Domine semper bona creas, sanctificas, vivificas, 
benedicis. Sextus quidem ordo sequitur, quando profer- 
tur, Per ipsum, et cum ipso, et in ipso, quando cum oblata 
calix tangitur. In eodem officio diaconi adhuc inclinati 
per ministerium acolythorum lavant manus suas. Et 
sacerdos quando dicit, Supplices te rogamus, humiliato 
capite, inclinat se ante altare. Et cum dixerit aperta 
clamans voce, Nobis quoque peccatoribus, surgunt sub- 
diaconi, et stant in loco, ubi ante steterunt, et sursum 
adspiciunt in faciem Pontificis. .Cum dixerit, Per quem 
haec omnia Domine, erigit se archidiaconus solus: et cum 
dixerit, Per ipsum, et cum ipso, levat cum offertorio calicem 
per ansas, et tenet exaltans illum juxta Pontificem. 
Pontifex autem tangit e latere calicem, eum oblatis duas 
faciens cruces, et dicens, Per ipsum, et cum 1pso, usque 
per omnia saecula saeculorum. Et ponit Pontifex obla- 
tiones in lóco suo, et archidiaconus calicem juxta eas, 
dimisso offertorio in ansas ejusdem. 


364 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Ordo of St. Amand 


Bibliothéque Nationale, Paris, MS. Lat. 974. DucHmEsnE, Origines 
(English edition), pp. 455-480 

p. 460-461. In Natale Domini sivein Aepyphania et in 
Sabbato sancto seu in Dominica sancta et in feria secunda, 
in Ascensa Domini et in Pentecosten vel in natale sancti 
Petri et sancti Pauli, stant episcopi post pontificem 
inclinato capite, presbiteri vero dextra levaque et tenet 
unusquisque corporale in manu sua, et dantur eis ab 
archidiacono oblatas duas ad unumquemque, et dicit 
pontifex canon ut audiatur ab eis, et sanctificantur 
oblaciones quas tenent, sicut et pontifex. [Diaconi vero 
stant] inclinato capite post episcopos et subdiaconi ante 
ipsum inclinato capite ad altare, usque dum dicit Nobis 
quoque. Et si isti dies solempni non sunt, dum calix po- 
nitur supra altare, revertuntur presbiteri in presbiterio; 
similiter et alius clerus revertitur subtus tabula; et si 
dominica evenerit, presbiteri inclinato capite stant, et si 
cotidianis diebus, genua flectant quando inchoant Sanctus. 
Et veniunt acolithi stantes ante altare post diaconos, 
dextra levaque, involuti cum sindonibus. Et unus ex 
illis involutus de palla cum cruce sirica, tenens patenam 
contra pectus suum, stans primus, et alii tenentes sciffos 
cum fontes, alii saecula. Et dum venerit pontifex ad 
omnis honor et gloria, levat duas oblatas in manus suas, 
et diaconus calicem tenens et levans paululum usque dum 
dicit: Per omnia saecula saeculorum, amen. 


Ordo Romanus, Besancon, France, tenth century 
British Museum, MS. (Add.) 15,222 


f. 27 v. Incipit ordo ecclesiastici Romanae ecclesiae 
vel qualiter missa celebratur. 

f. 38v. Quem dum expleverint - surgit pontifex solus et 
intratin canone Episcopi vero - diaconi - subdiaconi - et pres- 
biteri in presbiterio permanent inclinati. Et dum dixerit 


APPENDIX 365 


nobis quoque peccatoribus surgunt subdiaconi - cum dixerit 
per quem hec omnia domine surgit archdiaconus solus. 
cum dixerit per ipsum et cum ipso. Levat cum offertorio 
calicem per ansas - et tenet exaltans illud juxta pontifi- 
cem. Pontifex autem tangit e latere calicem cum oblatis 
dicens. Per ipsum-et cum  ipso:usque per omnia 
secula seculorum. Et ponit pontifex oblationes in loco 
suo. et archidiaconus calicem juxta eas. dimisso of- 
fertorio in ansas ejusdem. 


Ordo Romanus, adapted for the use of Amiens. c. 1050 A.D. 
British Museum, MS. (Add.) 17,004 


p.224 (f. 113v). Post cantatum autem angelicum 
hymnum -subdiaconi post altare ante episcopum vultu 
stant inclinato - donec corpus et sanguis domini conse- 
eretur et audiant. Nobis quoque peccatoribus. 


Ordo Missarum 


Ambrosian Library, Milan, MS. I., 152 inf. ff. 55 r-40 v. (pp. 46-53 
edition of Magistretti, Milan, 1894) 

p. 93. Post haec archiepiscopus vel presbyter dicit 
Credo in unum, et chorus dicit usque et Homo [actus est: 
et statim magister scholarum incipit cum pueris suis, et 
dicit usque in finem, inclinatis semper subdiaconibus post 
altare, quousque flexus archiepiscopus vel presbyter obla- 
tionem suam per manus angeli committat. Tunc vero 
erigens se, et illo osculante altare, eriguntur. Diaconi 
vero tam diu inclinati stant, quam archiepiscopus; et cum 
eo erecti osculantur altare. 


Missale Plenum. Twelfth century 
Biblioteca Barberini, MS. XIII., 12 


Rubric before Supplices té: Inclinet se retro altare et 


dicat iii: Deus omnipotens propitius esto mihi peccatori. 
EBNER, p. 149. 


366 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Alcuin. 735-804 A.p. 
Disputatio Puerorum. cap. x. De Missa 


Quinta deinde ponitur inlatio in sanctificatione obla- 
tionis, a loco, ubi dicitur. Per quem majestatem tuam 
laudent angeli, usque ad eum locum, ubi osanna in ex- 
celsis canitur. In qua etiam ad laudem terrestrium crea- 
turarum virtutumque coelestium universitas provocatur. 
Porro sexta hine succedit: Te igitur clementissime Pater, 
quae est confirmatio sacramenti; ut oblatio sanctificata 
per Spiritum Sanctum in corpus et sanguinem conformetur. 
Septima vero oratio est, quam Dominus noster discipulis 


suis instituit orare dicens: Pater noster, qui es in coelis. 
P. L. ci., 1135-1156. 


Liber Sacramentorum. (Super oblata) 


Memores sumus, aeterne Deus Pater omnipotens, glorio- 
sissimae passionis filii tui, resurrectionis etiam, ascensionis- 
quein caelum. Petimusergo majestatem Deus, ut ascendant 
preces humilitatis nostrae in conspectum tuae clementiae 
et descendat super hune panem, et super hunc calicem 
plenitudo tuae divinitatis. Descendat etiam Domine, illa 
Saneti Spiritus tui incomprehensibilis invisibilisque ma- 
jestas, sicut quondam in patrum hostias descendebat. 
Per eumdem Dominum. P. L. ci., 449. 


The Caroline Books. 794 a.p. 
ΒΚ: ΠΠ. ch xy 

. . . Cum scilicet corporis et sanguinis Dominici sacra- 
mentum ad commemorationem suae passionis et nostrae 
salutis nobis concessum ab eodem mediatore Dei et homi- 
num, per manum sacerdotis et invocationem divini nomi- 
nis conficiatur. . .. Et nimirum ad horum consecrationem 
sacerdos infulatus, cireumstantis populi deprecationes suis 
precibus miscens, cum interno rugitu memoriam faciat 
Dominicae passionis, et ab inferis resurrectionis, neenon et 
in coelos gloriosissimae ascensionis, et haec perferri per 


APPENDIX 367 


manus angeli in sublime altare Dei et in conspectum 
majestatis deposcat. 

Ipse namgue auctor humani generis, gui pro salute 
nostra carnem nostri causa non est dedignatus accipere, cum 
et Veteris Testamenti terminum et Novi, appropinguante 
suae sacratissimae passionis die, salutiferum constitueret 
initlum, et in se lapide angulari duos ex adverso parietes 
connectens, et seeundum Apostolum faciens utraque unum, 
accepto pane, benedicto ac fracto, hoc salutare discipulis 
dedit praeceptum: “ Aecipite," inquit, “et manducate, 
hoc est corpus meum:" similiter et calicem postquam 
coenavit accipiens, dedit discipulis suis dicens: “ Ac- 
cipite et bibite: hic est enim calix sanguis mei Novi et 
aeterni Testamenti qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur 
in remissionem peccatorum. Haee quotiescunque feceritis, 
in mei memoriam facietis." 

Multum igitur, ut ultra quam mentis oculo perstringi 
queat, distat sacramentum Dominici corporis et san- 
guinis ab imaginibus pictorum arte depictis: cum videlicet 
illud efficiatur operante invisibiliter Spiritu Dei, hae visi- 
biliter manu artificis; illud consecretur a sacerdote divini 
nominis invocatione, hae pingantur a pictore humanae 
artis eruditione; illud angelicis manibus in sublime Dei 
deferatur altare, hae humanis manibus per artem structae 


ad mirantium intuitus ponantur in pariete. 
P. L. xeviii., 1095, 1094, 1095. 


Theodulph of Orleans. {821 a.p. 


Liber de ordine Baptismi 


Est enim sacrificium salutare, quod et in Veteri Testa- 
mento Melchisedech rex Salem in typo corporis et san- 
guinis Domini obtulit, et in Novo idem mediator Dei et ' 
hominum antequam traderetur adimplevit, cum accipiens 
panem et calicem, et benedicens eis, et tradens discipulis 
suis, haec in suicommemoratione fieri praecepit. Hoc ergo 
mysterium sacrificii, derelietis ac finitis veteribus hostiis, 


368 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Ecelesia celebrat, offerens panem propter panem vivum 
qui de coelo descendit, vinum pro eo qui dixit, Ego sum 
vitis vera: ut per visibilem sacerdotum oblationem, et 
invisibilem Saneti Spiritus consecrationem, panis et vinum 


in corporis et sanguinis Domini transeant dignitatem. 
Ῥ. L. ον., 240, 


Agobard of Lyons. 7840 a.p. 


De Privilegio et Jure Sacerdotii 


XV. Sacramenta etenim divina, baptisma scilicet, et 
confectio corporis ac sanguinis Domini, caeteraque in qui- 
bus salus et vita fidelium consistit, tam magna et sancta 
sunt, ut nee bonorum meritis meliorari, nec malorum 
perversitate possint deteriorari; cum ad invocationem 
summi Sacerdotis, non humana virtute, sed Sancti Spiritus 
perficiantur ineffabiliter majestate. P. L. civ., 142-143. 


Liber contra libros quatuor Amalarii abbatis. ὃ xiii. 


Audiat etiam hoe Amalarius, quia sicut unum altare 
Ecclesiae, ita unus panis corporis Christi, et unus calix 
sanguinis ejus. Sie enim Apostolus accepit a Domino, et 
tradidit Ecclesiae: Quoniam Dominus noster Jesus 
Christus, in qua nocte tradebatur, accepit panem, et 
gratias agens, fregit, et dixit: Hoc est corpus meum, 
quod pro vobis tradetur. Hoc facite in meam eomme- 
morationem. Similiter et calicem, postquam coenavit, 
dicens: Hie ealix novum testamentum est in meo sanguine. 
Hoe facite quotiescunque sumitis in meam commemora- 
tionem. Unde et Ecclesia ex traditione apostolorum 
his verbis consecrans mysterium sacri corporis et sanguinis 
Domini, designanter dicit Dominum dixisse apostolis: 
Accipite et manducate ex hoc omnes. Hoc est enim 
corpus meum. Simili modo et posteaquam coenatum est, 
accipiens et hune praeclarum calicem.  Attendat fidelis 
quisque quid est quod dicit hunc. Videlicet quia calix 
quem sacerdos sacrificat, non est alius nisi ipse quem 


APPENDIX 369 


Dominus apostolis tradidit. Sicut ergo de sanguine, 


sie quoque de corpore sentiendum est. 
P. L. eiv., 347. 


Nicholas I. to Michael the Emperor. 800 a.p. 


Quia vero [sc. altare] sacratum est Dei adjutorio, et bene- 
4dietionem suscepit, unde et mensa sancta efficitur, panis 
iterum, qui super eum offertur, panis est quidem com- 
munis; sed quando ipse sacramento sacratus fuerit, corpus 
Christi in veritate fit, et dicitur. Sie et vinum modicum, 
aliquid digna existentia ante benedictionem, post sanctifi- 
cationem Spiritus, sanguls Christi efficitur. 

BAHR 7.18: 


Rabanus Maurus. 776-856 a.p. 


De Institutione Clericorum. Liber I., cap. xxxii. De officio missae 


Hunc autem morem sacrificii primum Dominus noster 
Jesus Christus et magister instituit, quando commendavit 
Apostolis suis corpus et sanguinem suum, priusquam tra- 
deretur, sicut legitur in Evangelio: Accepit, inquit, panem 
et benedicens fregit et dedit eis, et ait, Sumite, hoc est corpus 
meum, et accepto calice gratias agens dedit eis, et biberunt 
omnes ex illo, et reliqua. Cum benedictione enim et gratia- 
rum actione primum Dominus corporis et sanguinis sul 
sacramenta dedicavit, et apostolis tradidit, quod exinde 
apostoli imitati fecere et successores suos facere docuerunt, 
quod et nunc per totum orbem terrarum generaliter tota 
custodit Ecclesia. P.T.. evil., 322. 


Liber de sacris ordinibus, sacramentis divinis et vestimentis 

sacerdotalibus ad Thiotmarum. Cap. xix. De ordine missae 
Post hymnum angelicum guem concordi voce totus 
clerus simul cantat, seguitur oratio per guam sacramen- 
tum corporis et sanguinis Domini conficitur, quae sic 
inchoat. Te igitur . . . sacrificia illibata. . . . Sacri- 


ficia sunt quae etiam cum orationibus consecrantur. 
P. L. exii., 1182, 1183. 


370 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Ipseque voluit per nos panem et vinum offerri sibi 
et ab ipso divinitus consecrari, et fidelem populum credere 
verum esse mysterium quod ipse tradidit discipulis suis di- 
cens: Accipite εἰ manducate ex eo omnes. Similiter de calice 
dixit: Accipite et bibite ex hoc omnes. Et quando oculos. 
ad coelum levavit et Patri gratias egit, nos in hoc docuit, 
quod nos Patrem semper supplicare debemus, ut ille tam 
magnum sacramentum per manus nostras perficere dig- 
netur. Et cum diceret, Haec quotiescumque feceretis, in. 
mei memoriam facietis, jussit nos illius passionis quam 
pro nobis sustinuit sedulo memores esse, et maxime eo tem- 
pore, quando hoc sacramentum celebramus, ejusque mi- 
sericordiae atque bonitati nos commendamus. Unde et 
. . . Dei nostri. Hoc se sacerdos fecisse profitetur quod 
sibi a Domino imperatum est. Ideo enim ipsi sacerdotes. 
Fili Dei Domini videlicet Jesu Christi fideliter memores. 
esse debent, quia ipsi missam celebrant, et sacrificium 
offerunt Christi exemplo instructi; et scire debent quid 
celebrent, quia stulta postulatio est si postulat quis quod. 
nescit. P. L. exii., 1185-1186. 


O Domine, omnium memores supradictorum bonitatum 
tuarum offerimus tuae majestati hostiam puram hoc est 
corde puro, quia purum est corpus tuum, quod de hoc 
pane fieri credimus. — Hostiam sanctam, quia tu sanctifi- 
casti corpus tuum quando hominem in Deum assumpsisti, 
et nune sanctifica hune panem ut corpus tuum fiat. 
Hostiam immaculatam, quia tu sine macula peccati passus 
es pro nobis. Panem sanctum vitae aeternae, quia panis. 
vivus es, qui de coelo descendisti, et corpus tuum in hoc 
pane a te sanctificato nos accipere voluisti, et per calicem 
passionis tuae nos sanguinem tuum sumere voluisti. Tu 
sanctifica hane hostiam, ut nobis corpus tuum et san- 
guis tuus fiat. P. L. cxii., 1186. 


Et in pane et vino passionis suae mysterium nos imitari 
voluit, quando discipulis suis dans panem ac calicem dixit, 


APPENDIX 371 


Hoc est corpus meum, et hic est calix sanguinis mei. Et 
nos supplicare debemus ut sicut supradictorum patrum 
accepta Deo fuerunt munera, ita fiant et nostra. Sup- 
plices te rogamus . . . majestatis tuae. Humiliter ergo 
postulamus ut munera nostra super hoc altare quod videri 
potest oblata, Pater jubeat coelestis per manus sancti 
angeli sui perferri in illud altum altare quod est ante divi- 
nam majestatem suam, quod oculis nostris videre non 
possumus, quia corporale non est sed spiritale. Et 
sicut nos divinam majestatem Patris investigare non pos- 
sumus, ita nec ea quae in conspectu ejus sunt debemus 
investigare, sed potius credere. Ut quotquot . . . per 
Christum. Dominum | nostrum. Orare quidem debemus 
Patrem coelestem, ut omnes qui ex ipsius altaris partieipa- 
tione supra quod nos offerimus Deo Patri in commemo- 
ratione Filii sui Domini Dei nostri Jesu Christi, corpus et 
sanguinem praedicti Filii Dei sumpserimus, omnem bene- 
dietionem coelestem accipere mereamur per ipsum Chris- 
tum Dominum nostrum. P. L. cxii., 1187. 


Per Christum . . . praestas nobis. Hoc precamur ut per 
ipsum Christum Filium tuum unigenitum, per quem omnia 
bona creata sunt sanctificata et vivificata, haec sacra- 
menta benedicas, et nobis ad remedium sempiternum 
acciplendum praebeas. 

P. L. cxii., 1188. 


Amalarius. te. 850 Α.Ὀ. 
De Eeclesiasticis Officiis, Liber IIL, cap. xxiv. 
Quo ordine id perficiendum sit, ex Domini institutione 
addiscitur: accipit sacerdos panem manibus suis exemplo 
Christi; de quo dictum est: Accepit panem in sanctas ac 


venerabiles manus, et reliqua; similiter et calicem. 
EL. cv 1140. 


At si figi necesse est in loco ubi dicitur: Accipiens panem, 
seorsum necesse est [ut] figuretur super panem, et seorsum 


372 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


super vinum, secundum modo quo Christus usus, in ae- 
ceptione panis et calicis. P. L. ev., 1141. 


In eo pane commendavit Christus corpus suum, 
et in calice sanguinem suum, atque subjunxit: Haee 
quotiescunque feceritis, in mei memoriam facietis. Hic 
concrepant verba Dominicae mensae cum toto officio mis- 
sae. Canitur hie, Accipiens panem, et reliqua quod acti- 
tatur a sacerdote, quando suscipit oblatam in secreta 
missae aut quando hic eam elevat. (Gratias egit in Hy mno. 
Vere dignum et justum est: benedicit in praesenti loco, 
frangit circa communionem. Hic credimus naturam sim- 
plicem panis et vini mixti verti in naturam rationabilem, 
scilicet corporis et sanguinis Christi. P. L. cv., 1141. 


Precatur sacerdos ut praesens oblatio ita sit accepta 
in conspectu divinae majestatis, quatenus sumpturi 
eam, simul fiant coelestes et gratia. Dei repleti. Mira et 
magna fides sanctae Ecclesiae, quae suis oculis videt quod 
mortalibus deest: videt quid credere debeat, quamvis 
nondum videat quod in specie est. Credit sacrificium 
praesens per angelorum manus deferri ante conspectum 
Domini, et sentit mandendum esse ab humano ore. Üre- 
dit namque corpus et sanguinem Domini esse, ac hoc 


morsu coelesti benedictione impleri animas sumentium. 
P. L. cv., 1142. 


Eclogae de Officio Missae 
Qualiter quaedam orationes et cruces in T'e igitur agen- 
dae sunt. 
Rubries: 


Before A 21: Hie signat oblationem et calicem tribus 
vieibus, non tamen sub una cruce, sed 
separatim singulis singulas faciens cruces. 

Before B 6: Hie nomina vivorum  memorentur, si 

volueris, sed non Dominica die, nisi 
caeteris diebus. 


Before C 62: 


Before D 1: 


Before E 1: 


Before E 15: 


Before G 43: 


Before I 1: 


Before I 6: 


Before I 22: 
Before J 1: 


Before J 18: 


BeforeL 1: 


Before L 9: 


Before L 15: 


Before L 36: 
After L 40: 


APPENDIX 313 


Si fuerit natale sanctorum, hie dicat: 
Sed et diem natalitii beati illius. vel 
beatorum illorum celebrantes. 

Hic inclinat se usque ad altare, dicens. 

Hie erigit se sursum, solam oblatam hie 
benedicit. 

Hie ambos signat, id est, oblationem et 
calicem. 

Hie quatuor vicibus solam oblationem 
signat, et in quinta vice super calicem 
solum crucem faciens. 

Hic inclinat se iterum juxta altare, 
dicens. 

Hic orat apud se quod voluerit. 
dieit. 

Hic se erigit, haec verba dicens. 

Hie orationes duae dicuntur, una super 
dypticos, altera post lectionem nomi- 
num. Et hoc quotidianis vel in agendis 
tantummodo diebus. 

Et recitantur. Deinde postquam recitata 
fuerint, dicit. 

Hie archdiaconus erigens se venit, et 
involvens calicem mappula, levat ilum 
contra domnum papam. 

Hie ambos signat, id est, oblationem et 
calicem, tribus vicibus, singulis singulas 
faciens cruces. 

Hie levat domnus papa oblationes duas 
usque ad oram calicis; et tangens eum 
de oblationibus, tenente illum arch- 
diacono. 

Tune dicit in altum. 

Tune reponit oblationes in altare. 

P. L. ev., 1330-1332. 


Deinde 


374 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Council of Quierci. 858 a.p. 
Epistola Episcoporum ad Ludovicum, Regem Germaniae 


Cap. XV. Et nos Episcopi, Domino consecrati, non 
sumus hujusmodi homines ut sicut homines seculares in 
vassalatico debeamus nos cuilibet commendare, sed ad 
defensionem et ad adjutorium gubernationis in ecele- 
siastico regimine nos Ecelesiasgue nostras committere, 
aut jurationis sacramentum, quod nos evangelica et 
apostolica atque canonica auctoritas vetat, debeamus 
guoguo modo facere. Manus enim chrismate sacro per- 
uncta, quae de pane et vino aqua mixto per orationem 
et crucis signum conficit corporis et Christi sanguinis 
sacramentum, abominable est, quiequid ante ordinationem 
fecerit, ut post ordinationem episcopatus seculare tangat 


ullo modo sacramentum. 
Mansi, XVIII B, 119. 


« Micrologus." Eleventh century 


De Ecelesiasticis Observationibus 


Cap. X. Cooperitur quoque calix non tam causa mysterii 
quam cautelae, usque dum finito Canone dicetur: Oremus, 
Praeceptis salutaribus moniti. Discooperitur tamen, dum 
legitur, ubi dicitur: Accipiens et hunc praeclarum calicem. 
Et ibi: Per ipsum, et cum ipso, et hoc fortasse ideo quia 
cautius levatur sine operimento quam coopertus. 

P. L. cli., 983-984. 
Cap. XV., De acceptione oblationis in manus 


Deinde panis in manus accipitur, et antequam reponatur 
inaltare, benedicitur. Item et calix elevatus ante deposi- 
tionem benedicitur. Nam et ipse Dominus in Evangelio 
utrumque legitur benedixisse antequam dimitteret e mani- 
bus. Accepta enim in manibus benedixit, postea dis- 
cipulis dedit (Matth. XXVI). P. L. cli., 987. 

Cap. XXIII., Brevis descriptio celebrandae missae 


N.B. This includes the Canon in which the following rubrical 
directions are found. 


APPENDIX 375 


Before A 1: Canon juxta Romanam auctoritatem est 
iste. 

Before A 21: Hic signat sacerdos oblationem et calicem 
tribus vieibus, sub una cruce. 

Before Ὦ 6: Hie nomina vivorum memorentur, si vo- 
lueris, sed non Dominica. 

Before D 1: Hic inclinatur usque ad altare dicens. 

Before E 1: Erectus autem cum tribus crucibus bene- 
dicit. 

Before E 15: Hie separatim signat oblatam et calicem. 

Before G 43: Hie tres cruces super utrumque simul facit, 
et quartam super oblationem, et quin- 
tam super calicem. 

Before I 1: Hic inclinat se juxta altare dicens. 

Before I 22: Hie erigit se dicens. 

Before J 1: Hie duae orationes dicuntur. 

Before J 18: Et recitantur nomina. 

Before L 9: Hic tres cruces super utrumque simul facit. 

Before L 15: Hie eum oblata quatuor cruces facit super 
calicem, et quintam in latere ipsius. 

Before L 36: Hie elevat oblatam cum calice dicens. 

After L 40: Et deponit oblatam dicens. 

P. L. cli., 993-994. 


Ratramn of Corbey. fl. c. 868 A.D. 


Liber de Corpore et Sanguine Domini 


IX. Panis qui per sacerdotis ministerium Christi corpus 
conficitur. 

X. Vinum quoque, quod sacerdotali consecratione 
Christi sanguinis efficitur sacramentum. . .. Post mys- 
ticam consecrationem. P. L. cxxi., 181. 


XVII. Accessit sancti Spiritus per sacerdotis consecra- 
tionem virtus, et efficax facta est non solum corpora, 
verum etiam animas diluere, et spirituales sordes spirituali 
potentia dimovere. P. L. cxxi., 135. 


3/6 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


XL. Nec tamen falso dicitur quod in mysteriis illis 
Dominus vel immoletur, vel patiatur quoniam illius mortis 
atque passionis habens similitudinem quarum existunt 
repraesentationes. Unde Dominicum corpus et sanguis. 
Dominieus appellantur, quoniam ejus sumunt appellatio- 
nem, cujus existunt sacramentum. Hine beatus Isidorus 
in libris Etymologiarum (lib. vi., cap. 19), sic ait: “Sa- 
erifieium dictum, quasi sacrum factum, quia prece mystica. 
consecratur in memoriam pro nobis Dominicae pas- 
sionis. Unde hoc, eo jubente, corpus Christi et san- 
guinem dicimus, quod dum fit ex fructibus terrae, 
sanctificatur et fit sacramentum, operante invisibiliter 
Spiritu Dei," etc. 

P. L. exxi., 144-145. 

XLI. Et iste doctor catholicus sacrum illud Domi- 
nicae passionis mysterium in memoriam pro nobis Do- 
minicae passionis docet agendum. Hoc dicens ostendit 
Dominicam passionem semel esse factam, ejus vero me- 


moriam in sacris solemnibus repraesentari. 
PL. οσσι 145: 


XLII. Unde et panis qui offertur, ex fructibus terrae 
cum sit assumptus, in Christi corpus dum sanctificatur, 
transponitur: sieut et vinum, cum ex vite defluxerit, 
divini tamen sanctificatione mysterii efficitur sanguis 
Christi; non quidem visibiliter, sed, sicut ait praesens 


doctor, operante invisibiliter Spiritu Dei. 
ἘΠῚ οσχι. 145. 


Paschasius Radbertus. ft 865 A.D. 


De Corpore et Sanguine Domini 


IV. 3. Vera utique Christi caro, quae crucifixa est et 
sepulta, vere illius carnis sacramentum, quod per sacerdo- 
tem super altare in. verbo Christi per Spiritum Sanctum 
divinitus consecratur; unde ipse Dominus clamat: Hoc est 
corpus meum. Jee ΚΣ NEŽ): 


APPENDIX 477 


VIII. 1. Nec praesentiam divinae majestatis veri- 
tus, dum cogitat nihil amplius, quam quae videntur, 
nec intelligit miser, quod numquam caro Christi, nisi de 
manu ejus et sublimi ara ubi Christus pontifex futurorum 
bonorum pro omnibus assistit, jure accipitur. Unde 
sacerdos cum haec incipit immolare inter caetera: Jube, 
inquit, haec perferri per manus sancti angeli tui in sublime 
altare tuum, in conspectu divinae majestatis tuae. Et 
cogitas, o homo, aliunde illud accipere quam de altari, 
ubi sublimius transpositum consecratur? 

2. Sed fortassis ad haec “ caeca cogitatio" dicit: Et 
quomodo in coelum ante conspectum divinae majestatis 
tam subito offertur cum hic aut panis aut caro licet dicatur 
in manu sacerdotis [et] visibiliter semper [v. /. super 
altare] teneatur . . .? Disce quia Deus Spiritus illocaliter 
ubique est. Intellige quia spiritalia haec sieut nec loca- 
liter, sic utique πες carnaliter ante conspectum divinae 
majestatis in sublime feruntur. Cogita igitur si quippiam 
corporeum potest esse sublimius, cum substantia panis et 
vini in Christi carnem et sanguinem efficaciter interius 
commutatur; ita ut deinceps post consecrationem jam 
vera Christi caro et sanguis veraciter credatur, et non 
aliud quam Christus panis de coelo a credentibus aestime- 
tur. Putasne aliud esse altare ubi Christus pontifex 
assistit quam corpus suum, per quod et in quo Deo Patri 
vota fidelium et fidem credentium offert; quod si veraciter 
corpus Christi altare illud coeleste creditur, jam non 
aliunde carnem et sanguinem quam de ipso Christi cor- 
pore sumere te putabis? P. L. exx., 1286, 1287, 1288. 


XII. 1. Vere credere et indubitanter scire debemus 
infra catholicam Ecclesiam, ubi catholica fide hoc myste- 
rium celebratur, nihil a bono majus, nihilque a malo [minus] 
percipi sacerdote, nihilque aliud quam caro Christi et 
sanguis, dum catholice consecratur, quia non in merito 
consecrantis, sed in verbo efficitur Creatoris et virtute 


378 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Spiritus sancti, ut caro Christi et sanguis, non alia quam 
quae de Spiritu Sancto creata est, vere fide credatur, et 
spiritali intelligentia degustetur. Si enim in merito esset 
sacerdotis, non ad Christum pertineret; nunc autem 
sicut ipse est qui baptizat, ita ipse est qui per Spiritum 
Sanctum, hane suam efficit carnem, et transfundit vinum 
in sanguinem. Quis enim alius in utero creare potuerit, 
ut Verbum caro fieret? Sic itaque in hoc mysterio creden- 
dum est, quod eadem virtute Spiritus Sancti per verbum 
Christi caro ipsius et sanguis efficiatur invisibili operatione. 
Unde et sacerdos: Jube haec perferri per manus angeli 
tui in sublime altare tuum in conspectu divinae majestatis 
tuae; ut quid perferri illuc ea deposcit, nisi ut intelliga- 
tur quod in ejus sacerdotio ista fiant. Ipse enim factus 
est pontifex in aeternum secundum ordinem Melchise- 
dech, teste apostolo, ad interpellandum pro nobis, offerens 
semetipsum Deo Patri. . . . Prius autem quam corpus 
consecratione fiat, oblatio sacerdotis est, sicut ipse con- 
fitetur, vel cunctae familiae offerentis eam: sed in verbo 
et virtute Spiritus Sancti nova fit creatura in corpore 
Creatoris ad nostrae reparationis salutem. Unde juxta 
sublimis aram altaris semper adsistere scriptura teste 
probatur, ut ex ejus immolatione corpus et sanguinem 
percipiamus. P: L. Cxx.. 1811, 1212; 


XV. Quibus verbis hoc mysterium conficitur 


Nulli dubium quod sieut quando in nomine Patris, 
et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti tertio mergimur in fonte, tunc 
utique baptizamur, non in virtute illius et potestate qui 
haee dieit, sed in virtute Christi, qui hoc praecepit, dicens: 
Ite, docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine 
Patris, et Fili, et Spiritus sancti. Sie utique et hoc 
sacramentum non meritis, non verbis humanis, sed procul 
dubio divinis efficitur et consecratur mandatis. Creatur 
enim ibidem ex aliquo, non qualiseunque, sed nova 
salutis creatura, caro et sanguis Christi, veluti in baptismo 


APPENDIX 379 


homines nova efficiuntur creatura, et corpus Christi. 
(Ambr.) ldeirco non aestimandum est. quod alterius 
verbis, quod ullius alterius meritis quod potestate alicujus 
ita fiant, sed verbo Creatoris quo cuneta creata sunt 
visibilia et invisibilia: cujus ergo potentia creata sunt 
prius, ejus utique verbo ad melius recreantur, quia nemo 
creator alicujus rei, aut recreator, nisi unus Deus catholice 
praedicatur. Propterea veniendum est ad verba Christi, 
et credendum quod in ejusdem verbis ista conficiuntur. 
Reliqua vero omnia quae sacerdos dicit, aut clerus canit, 
nihil aliud quam laudes, et gratiarum actiones sunt, aut 
certe obsecrationes fidelium, postulationes, petitiones. 
Verba autem Christi sicut divina sunt, ita efficacia, ut 
nihil aliud proveniat quam quod jubent, quia aeterna sunt. 
Coelum, inquit, et terra transient, verba autem mea non 
transibunt (Matth. xxiv. 35), sed facient omnia ad quae 
praemissa sunt, quia Patris nonnisi unum et substantivum 
et consubstantiale ac sempiternum est Verbum. Unde 
sacerdos prius inter caetera etiam verba evangelistarum 
assumens, ait: Qui pridie quam pateretur accepit panem 
in sanctas ac venerabiles manus suas, elevatis oculis in 
coelum ad te Patrem suum omnipotentem, gratias tibi agens 
benedixit, fregit et dedit. discipulis suis. Ecce usque ad 
istud locum verba sunt evangelistarum; porro deinceps 
verba sunt Dei, potestate et omni efficentia plena: Acci- 
pite et manducate ex hoc omnes, Hoc est enim corpus meum. 
Sed ne forte putares quod de illo uno tantum pane 
et in illa una hora hoc eum esse jusserit secutus ad- 
jungens ait; Hoc facite in meam commemorationem (Luc. 
xxii. 20 et seqq.). Unde fatendum, quod quidquid tune 
illud fuit quod Apostoli ab eo perceperunt, hoc totum est, 
quia id ipsum est: et si velis audire quid est, Hoc est, 
inquit, corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur. Crede, 
o fili, quia ita est, quoniam ipse dixit, et factum dubitare 
non potes; Ipse mandavit et creatum est. Praeceptum 
ergo posuit, In meam commemorationem hoc facite: et 


380 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ideo quotiescunque fit catholice, vere hoc fit quod dictum 
est: Hoc est corpus meum. 

2. Simili modo posteaquam coenatum est: refert sacerdos 
verba evangelistae: Accipiens hunc praeclarum calicem. Et 
notandum quod hunc quem offerimus, et non alium, insanc- 
tas ac venerabiles manus suas, [ab eo quod continet id quod 
continetur ostendens, dicit eum accepisse, ] item tibi gratias 
agens benedixit, et dedit. discipulis suis, dicens. Audisne 
utique, quod ipse gratias egerit, quod benedixerit? et ideo 
lieet nos gratias agamus Deo, ille est qui pro nobis 
gratias agit per se, et nos tamen per ilum; et quia per 
illum, ejus gratiarum actio jure dicitur. Sic itaque, licet 
sacerdos benedicat, ipse est qui benedicit et frangit; 
alioquin nisi ejus esset benedictio, nulla sanctitas in eo 
esset: unde in Levitico ad Aaron et ad filios ejus: Invo- 
cabitis ergo nomen meum super filios Israel, et ego bene- 
dicam eos (Num. iv. 27). Sacerdos ergo invocat, sed ipse 
benedicit et frangit [v. |. Quod sacerdos in consecratione 
quorumlibet invocat, sed Christus benedicit, frangit et 
tribuit]; quia nisi ille frangeret hune panem, parvuli 
omnes jejuni remanerent. Hine quoque propheta sus- 
pirans, quia necdum Christus venerat, aiebat in Lamenta- 
tionibus suis: Parvuli petierunt panem, nec erat qui 
jrangeret eis (Thren. iv. 4). Et ideo hie solus est qui 
frangit hunc panem, et per manus ministrorum distribuit. 
etiam calicem credentibus, dicens: Accipite et bibite ex 
hoc omnes, tam ministri quam et reliqui credentes: Hic 
est calix sanguinis mei novi et aeterni testamenti. In hoc 
quippe verbo sanguis efficitur, quod ante vinum et aqua 
fuerat. Efficitur ergo sanguis, sed ille utique quem dis- 
cipulis tradidit; sanguis plane Novi et aeterni Testamenti, 
quod testamentum nunquam immutabitur, quia aeternum 
est; nunquam veterascet, nunquam irritum erit; et 
hoc est testamentum haereditatis nostrae, per quod nobis 
divina et coelestia traduntur. 

3. Hoc igitur est mysterium fidei. De hujus namque 


APPENDIX 981 


sanguinis figura populus sanctificatus est Veteris Testa- 
menti. Sed in illo sanguine umbra erat, hic autem veritas: 
qui pro vobis, inquit, effundetur et pro multis in remissionem 
peccatorum. Nam ubi Lucas dixit, pro vobis, ibi Mat- 
thaeus pro multis posuit. (Matth. xxvi. 28); unde creden- 
dum quod Christus utrumque dixerit, quia hie sanguis 
et pro apostolis et pro multis qui eredituri erant per ver- 
bum eorum effusus est. Hic utique et non alius, neque 
alieujus alterius, sed sanguis Jesu Christi in hoc verbo 
effieitur. Viget autem hoc verbum et manet, Hic est 
enim calix sanguinis mei, qui pro vobis fundetur et pro 
multis. Quapropter, o homo, quotiescunque bibis hunc 
calicem, aut manducas hune panem, non alium san- 
guinem te putes bibere, quam eum qui pro te et pro 
omnibus effusus est in remissionem peccatorum; neque 
aliam carnem, quam quae pro te et pro omnibus tradita 
est et pependit in cruce, quia sic Veritas testatur: Hoc 
est corpus meum, quod pro vobis tradetur. Et de calice: 
Hic enim sanguis meus est, qui pro vobis efjundetur in 
remissionem peccatorum. Unde sicut tunc in remissionem | 
peccatorum et traditus, ita adhuc hodie in remissionem 
comeditur et potatur delietorum: ut quia in terris sine 
quotidianis levibusque delictis vivere non possumus, ut 
praemisi, tali esca et potu refecti, sine macula et ruga 
inveniamur, et non solum hoc, sed etiam omni bene- 
dietione coelesti, quae in illis est, repleamur, ac per hoc 
unum corpus cum illo et in illo maneamus, uti Christus 


caput et nos omnes membra censeamur. 
P. L. exx., 1321-1324. 


Florus Magister. T1359 a.p. 
De Expositione Missae 
42. Post has laudes et gratiarum actiones pro tanta 
gratia redemptionis nostrae, quae in illo divino mysterio 
agitur et commendatur, facto totius Ecclesiae silentio, 
in quo cessante omni strepitu verborum, sola ad Deum 


382 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


dirigatur intentio, et devotio cordium, sociatis sibi 
omnium votis et desideriis, incipit sacerdos orationem 
fundere, qua ipsum mysterium Dominici corporis et 
sanguinis consecratur. P. L. cxix., 43. 


43. Pro qua autem re dicit sacerdos ad Deum Patrem 
rogamus et petimus, nisi pro eo quod sequitur, videlicet 
ut ea quae ipsi offeruntur dona, munera sancta, sacrificia. 
accepta, id est beneplacita habeat et benedicat?  Sacer- 
dotum est enim offere et majestatem Dei invocare; Dei 
est autem dignanter suscipere, et ea quae offeruntur 
benedicere, sicut in lege praecepit sacerdotibus dicens: 
Sic benedicetis fiiis Israel, et dicetis eis, et post verba 
benedictionis subjungit: Invocabunt nomen meum super 
filios Israel et ego benedicam eis. Quid apertius? Illi invo- 
cabunt et ego benedicam, et tamen supra eis dixerat, 
Sic benedicetis, sed ili exorando, ile largiendo. Ita 
ergo et in oblatione divini sacrificii sacerdotes exhibent 
offerendi et supplicandi ministerium; sed Deus largiter 
benedictionis donum per unum et verum Sacerdotem, 
per quem et oblata sanctificat, et sanctificata acceptat, 
dieunt itaque. 

44. Uti accepta habeas et benedicas, ac si suppliciter 
dicant: Petimus ut haec Spiritu tuo sanctifices atque 
ore tuo benedieas, ut quod nostrae humilitatis geritur 


ministerio, tuae virtutis impleatur effectu. 
P. L. cxix., 43-44. 


59. Quam oblationem tu, Deus, in omnibus, ete. Oratur 
omnipotens, ut oblationem suis sacris altaribus impositam 
et tantis precibus commendatam, ipse per virtutem des- 
cendentis [Spiritus] ita legitimam et perfectam Eucha- 
ristiam efficiat, ut in omnibus sit ascripta. . . . Sit 
quoque ejusdem Spiritus Sancti operante virtute, rationa- 
bilis et per haec omnia singulariter Deo grata et aecep- 
tabilis, ut quamvis de simplicibus terrae frugibus sumpta, 


APPENDIX 383 


divinae benedictionis ineffabili potentia efficiatur corpus 
et sanguis unigeniti Fili Dei, sicut ipse testatur: Caro 
mea vere est cibus, et sanguis meus vere est potus. . . . 

60. Qui pridie quam pateretur accepit panem, ete., 
usque ad haec quotienscumque jeceritis, in mei memoriam 
Jacietis. . . . In his verbis, sine quibus nulla lingua 
nulla regio, nulla civitas, id est nulla pars Ecclesiae 
catholicae conficire potest, id est consecrare sacramentum 
eorporis et sanguinis Domini, ipse Dominus tradidit 
apostolis, unde universalis Ecclesia jugem memoriam 
sui Redemptoris celebret, et apostoli generaliter omni 
Ecclesiae. Christi ergo virtute et verbis semper con- 
secratur et consecrabitur. Illius sermo est qui coelestia 
sacramenta sanctificat. Ille in suis sacerdotibus quotidie 
loquitur. Illi funguntur officio, ille majestate divinae 
potestatis operatur. Ipse enim ille verus Melchisedech, 
qui haee sancta sacrificia, quae tunc in mysterio praefigura- 
vit, per oblationem sui corporis suique sanguinis adim- 
plevit. Ipse ex Spiritus paracliti virtute et coelesti 
benedietione sanctum corpus et sanguinem suum esse 
perfieit. . . . Unde et Ecclesia ex traditione his verbis 
consecrans mysterium sacri corporis et sanguinis Domini. 
designanter dieit Dominum dixisse apostolis: Accipite 
et manducate ex hoc omnes; hoc est enim corpus meum. 
Simili modo postquam coenatum est, accipiens εἰ hunc cali- 
cem praeclarum. Attendat fidelis, quisque, quid est quod 
dieat hunc, videlicet, quod calix, quem sacerdos catholicus 
sacrificat, non est alius, nisi ipse quem Dominus apostolis 
tradidit. 

66. Supplices te rogamus, omnipotens Deus, etc. Haec 
verba mysterii tam profunda, tam mira et stupenda quis 
comprehendere sufficiat? Quis inde digne aliquid loqua- 
tur? Magis veneranda sunt et pavenda quam discutienda. 
Beatus tamen Gregorius, idoneus tanti mysterii inter- 
pres, in quodam loco aliquid de iis tanquam de re 
ineffabili pene ineffabiliter loquitur. Quis enim fidelium, 


381 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


inquit, habere dubium possit, in ipsa immolationis hora, 
ad sacerdotis vocem coelos aperiri, in illo Jesu Christi 
mysterio angelorum choros adesse, summis ima sociari, 
terram coelestibus jungi, unum quid ex visibilibus atque 
invisibilibus fieri? . . . Fit ergo et in ista oratione et 
oblatione sacra consecrationis aliquid incomprehensibile 
et ineffabile, et multo his omnibus mirabilius, ut per ange- 
Ίσα ministeria et supplicationes tanquam de sublimi 
altari divinae majestatis conspectibus offerantur in illa 
immolationis hora, cum astantibus sibi ministris coelesti- 


bus Christus, ut proposita consecret, adesse eredendus est. 
P. L. cxix., 51, 52, 53, 58, 60. 


72. . . . Et statim conclusio totius consecrationis 
sequitur dicendo: 

73. Per quem omnia semper bona creas, etc. Per ipsum 
enim omnipotens Deus haec bona omnia quae sacris 
altaribus consecrantur, non solum in exordio mundi crea- 
vit, condendo quod non erat. .. . Per ipsum enim, 
ut dietum est, Deus Pater haec omnia bona semper creat, 
et ereata ac suis conspectibus oblata sanctificat, ut quae 
erant simplex creatura, fiant sacramenta. . .. Hoe 
ergo ad tanti mysterii consecrationem, sicut in omni 
legitima oratione respondent fideles, et respondendo 
subseribunt. P. L. cxix., 64, 65. 


Opuscula adversus Amalarium. 1.9 


Prorsus panis ille sacrosanctae oblationis corpus est 
Christi, non materie vel specie visibili, sed virtute et 
potentia spirituali. Neque enim in agro nobis corpus 
Christi gignitur, aut in vinea sanguis ejus exoritur, vel 
toreulari exprimitur. Simplex e frugibus panis conficitur, 
simplex a botris vinum liquatur, accedit ad haec offerentis 
Ecclesiae fides, accedit mysticae precis consecratio, accedit 
divinae virtutis infusio, sieque, mire, et ineffabili modo, 
quod est naturaliter ex germine terreno panis et vinum, 


APPENDIX 389 


efficitur spiritualiter corpus Christi, id est vitae et salutis 
nostrae mysterium, in quo aliud oculis corporis, aliud 
fidei videmus obtentu; nec id tantum quod ore percipimus, 
sed quod mente credimus, libamus. Ῥ Le xix, 77. 


Pseudo-Alcuin. Tenth or eleventh century 
De Divinis Officiis. Cap. xl. 


Missa autem dicitur, quasi transmissa, vel quasi trans- 
missio, eo quod populus fidelis de suis meritis non prae- 
sumens, preces et oblationes, quas Deo omnipotenti 
offerre desiderat, per ministerium et orationem sacer- 
dotis ad Deum transmittat. P. L. ci., 1246. 


Hucusgue praefatio et exhortatio, huie obsecratio 
sequitur. 

Post haslaudes . . . incipit sacerdos orationem fundere 
qua ipsum mysterium Dominici corporis et sanguinis 
consecratur. 

Sacerdotum enim est offere et majestatem Dei invocare. 

Uti accepta habeas et benedicas, ac si suppliciter dieat: 
Petimus, ut haee Spiritu tuo sanctifices, atque ore bene- 
dieas, ut quod nostrae humilitatis geritur ministerio, tuae 
virtutis impleatur effectu. P. L. ci., 1256, 1257. 


Hucusque obsecratio: huie sequitur consecratio ita 
incipiens: Quam oblationem, etc. Oratur Deus, ut 
oblationem suis altaribus impositam, et tantis precibus 
commendatam, ipse per virtutem Spiritus Sancti ita 


perfectam Eucharistiam accipiat . . . ut quamvis de 
simplicibus terrae frugibus sumpta, benedictionis potentia 
efficiatur corpus et sanguis Fili Dei. P. L. ci., 1260. 


Christi ergo virtute et verbis iste panis et calix ab 
initio consecratus est, et semper consecratur, et conse- 
erabitur. Ipse enim loquens per sacerdotes sua verba, 


386 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


coelesti benedictione sanctum corpus et sanguinem suum 
perficit. P. L. ci., 1260. 


Supplices te rogamus, omnipotens Deus, jube haec per- 
ferri, et reliqua. Haec verba tam profunda quis com- 
prehendere sufficiat? Quis inde digne aliqua loqua- 
tur? Magis veneranda sunt, quam discutienda. Beatus 
tamen Gregorius idoneus tanti sacramenti interpres, 
quodam loco de eis tanquam de re ineffabili pene ineffa- 
biliter loquens: Quis, inquit, fidelium habere dubium 
possit, in ipsa immolationis hora ad sacerdotis vocem 
coelos aperiri, in illo Jesu Christi mysterio angelorum 
choros adesse, summis ima sociari, terrena coelestibus. 
jungi, unum quiddam ex visibilibus atque invisibilibus 
fieri? Idem quoque alibi: Uno, inquit, eodem tempore ac 
momento, et in excelsis rapitur per ministerium angelorum 
consociandum corpori Christi, et ante oculos sacerdotis 
in altari videtur. . . . Fit ergo in ista oblatione aliquid 
ineffabile, ut per angelica ministeria, tanquam de sublime 
altari, divinae majestati offeratur, cum astantibus min- 
istris coelestibus Christus, ut oblata consecret, adesse 
credendus est. P. L. ci., 1262-1263. 


Confessio Fidei. IV., ii. 


Christi enim virtute et verbis panis ille et calix ab initio 
consecratus est. Christi virtute et verbis consecratus 
semper et consecrabitur. Ipse in suis sacerdotibus. 
quotidie loquitur. Illius sermo est, qui coelestia sacra- 
menta sanctificat. Sacerdotes funguntur officio, sed 
Christus majestate divinae potestatis operatur. Ipse est 
enim ille verus Melchisedech, qui sancta sacrificia, quae 
ile in mysterio tunc praefiguravit, per oblationem sui 
corporis suique sanguinis adimplet, et semper ab ipso 
initio, quo instituit adimplevit. Ipse ea Spiritus paracleti 
virtute, et coelesti benedictione sanctum corpus et sangui- 
nem suum esse perfecit. P. L. ci., 1087. 


APPENDIX 387 


Acta Synodi Atrebatensis. 1025 A.n. 
II. De Corpore et Sanguine Domini 

Quod quidem sacrificium de pane, et vino cum aqua 
misto, ineffabili sanctificatione, cruce et verbis illius in 
altari consecratur, dumque passionis et resurrectionis 
ejus, atque in coelum ascensionis ibidem salutifera memoria 
agitur, verum ac proprium corpus ipsius Domini nostri 
Jesu Christi, et sanguis verus ac proprius efficitur, quamvis 
alius esse videatur. P! Eocxlii., 1278. 


Council at Rome. 1079 a.p. 


Maxima siguidem pars panem et vinum per sacrae 
orationis verba et sacerdotis consecrationem, Spiritu 
Sancto invisibiliter operante, converti substantialiter in 
corpus Dominicum de Virgine natum, guod et in cruce pe- 
pendit, et in sanguinem qui de ejus latere militis effusus 
est lancea, asserebat, atgue auctoritatibus orthodoxorum 
sanctorum Patrum, tam Graecorum guam Latinorum, modis 
omnibus defendebat. 


Berengar’s Oath 


Ego Berengarius corde credo, et ore confiteor, panem 
et vinum guae ponuntur in altari per mysterium sacrae 
oratlonis et verba nostri Redemptoris substantialiter 
converti in veram et propriam ac vivificatricem carnem 
et sanguinem Jesu Christi. P. L. exlviii., 809, 811. 


Berengar of Tours. + 1088 a.p. 
De Sacra Coena 
In sequentibus: Offerimus majestati tuae de tuis donis 
ac datis, quod necessario intelligitur de multitudine 
creaturae tuae vel de creatura panis et vini, panem 
sanctum, quod necessario intelligis panem, qui propria 
locutione dicitur panis. Hie enim sanctificari potest ad 
sacerdotum praeces, quod minime potuit panis tropicus, qui 
de coelo descendit, qui ipsos potius sanctifieat sacerdotes. 
Edition of A. F. and F. Th. Vischer, Berlin, 1834, pp. 279-280. 


383 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Eusebius Bruno, Bishop of Angers. 71088 A.p. 
Epistola ad Berengarium Magistrum 


Dominus Jesus pridie quam . . . facietis. Hujus 
verbi, per quod omnia facta sunt, virtute et effectu panem 
post consecrantis in haec verba sacerdotis sacrationem, 
verum corpus Christi, et vinum eodem modo verum 
sanguinem esse credimus et confitemur. 

P. L. cxlvii., 1203. 


Durandus of Troarn. 71088 a.p. 
Liber de Corpore et Sanguine Christi 

In qua sententia illud diligenter et praecipue perpendum 
proponimus quod ex terrae fructibus accipi ac prece 
mystiea corpus Christi ac sanguinem consecrari dicitur 
per quamdam manum divinam, a forma visibili invisibili 
ter operante Spiritu Sancto, hoc tam magnum fiat sacra- 
mentum ad invisibilem speciem indubitanter perduci 
pronuntiatur, revera enim ex visibilibus et terrenis sub- 
stantiis, id est pane et vino aqua misto, incomprehensibili 
Saneti Spiritus opifielo, verbis quoque mysticis sanctum 
Domini corpus ac verus sanguis efficitur, mutata non specie, 
sed natura. P. L. exlix., 1379-1380. 


Hoc facite. Quid est, hoc facite? Id est hoc corpus, 
hune sanguinem meis verbis, mea invocatione conficite. 

IP ο 138% 

Guitmund of Aversa. +1089 A.n. 
De Corpore et Sanguine Domini 

Quidem negare nequeunt substantiam corporis Christi 
cibo inesse Dominico, panem tamen et vinum per verba 
Salvatoris in carnem ejus et sanguinem verti nequaquam 

credentes. P. L. exlix., 1480-1481. 


Odo of Cambray. 11113 a.p. 
Expositio in Canonem Missae 


Tolle verba Christi, non fiunt sacramenta Christi. Vis 
fieri Christi corpus et Sanguinem, appone Christi sermonem. 


APPENDIX 389 


Facit sermo Veritatis quod dicit: quia ipse dixit et facta 
sunt, ipse mandavit et creata sunt. Sine dubio fit in crea- 
tura quod Christi sermo dicit de creatura. Etenim omni- 
potens sermo tuus, o Genitor. Fit ergo sermone Christi 
corpus et sanguis Christi. P. L. elx:, 1068. 


Bruno of Segni. +112 a.p. 
Commentaria in Matthaeum. P. IV., Cap. xxvi., § 104 


Ecce sacerdos in aeternum secundum ordinem Mel- 
chisedech panem et vinum virtute ineffabili in sui corporis 
et sanguinis substantiam convertit. P. L. clxv., 290. 


Dixit enim tunc per se: dicit et modo per suos ministros. 
Hoc est corpus meum: et tanta est ejus verbi virtus et 
efficacia, ut statim fiat quod dicitur. Similiter autem, 
dum dieit: Hic est sanguis meus, mox in ejus sanguinem 
vinum convertitur. P. L. elxv., 291. 


Sententiarum. Lib. IV., Cap. ix. 

Ipse enim dixit, et facta sunt, ipse mandavit, et creata 
sunt. (Ps. xxxii. 9.) Sie igitur, e£ modo cum dixisset : 
Hoc est corpus meum; et hic est sanguis meus; tanta fuit 
potentia in verbo ejus, ut illico et panis mutaretur in car- 
nem, et vinum mutaretur in sanguinem. P.L. elxv., 1005. 


Sed quare nos in istis laboramus? Ipsius verba nobis 
sufficiant. Ipse enim dixit. Hoc est corpus meum ;- 


postea dicit: Hc est sanguis meus. . . . Si Christo non 
eredimus, cui credimus? Ubi tanta autoritas est, ibi 
argumenta necessaria non sunt. P. L. elxv., 1007. 


Honorius of Autun. ft 1120 A.p. 
Gemma Animae. Lib. L, cap. 52. De tertio ordine 


In tertio ordine panem in manum suscipimus, et bene- 
dicimus, et tempus gratiae innotescimus, quo Simeon 
Christum jam natum panem vivum in manus accepit, 
et gaudens benedixit. Deinde calicem levamus, et bene- 


390 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


dieimus, et tempus coenae exprimimus, quo Christus panem 
et calicem manibus elevavit et benedixit, et inde corpus 
et sanguinem apostolis tradidit. Unde adhuc cum verba 
Domini in ordine recitantur, panis et vinum in corpus et 
sanguinem Domini commutantur. P. L. elxxii., 559-560. 


Hildebert of Tours. 711133 a.p. 
De Mysterio Missae 


Quaesumus ut placatus. 
Hoe sane totum verbis confertur in illis, 
Quae subdit sacrifex, non sua, sed Domini. 
Quippe recensurus, quae protulit ille, vel egit, 
Cum coenans idem, coena beata fit. 

Qui pridie quam pateretur, accipit panem. 
Panis in hoe verbo, sed adhue communis, ab ara 
Sumitur, et sumptum tollit utraque manu. - 
Presbyter hinc idem, cum pervenit ad benedixit, 
Imprimit elato mystica signa crucis. 
Nec prius in mensam demittit, quam tua, Christi, 
Verba repraesentans explicit ista super. 

Accipite εἰ manducate ex hoc omnes. 
Hinc levat et calicem, signatque, nec ante reponit 
Quam super Auctoris verba retractet ita: 
Accipite et bibite ex eo omnes, usque in remissionem pec- 

catorum. 

Si qua fides patribus, quos vita beata perennat 
Esca fit haec animae, quae modo carnis erat. 
His verbis utrumque novas acquirere vires 
Majoresque suis scripta probata docent. 
Sub cruce, sub verbo natura novatur, et aram, 
Panis honorificat carne, cruore cruore calix. 
Presbyter idcirco, cum verba venitur ad illa, 
In quibus altari gratia tanta datur, 
Tollit utrumque, notans, quod sit communibus escis 


Altior, et quiddam majus utrumque gerat. 
P. L. clxxi., 1186-1187. 


APPENDIX 391 


Stephen of Autun. {1150 a.p. 


Tractatus de Sacramento Altaris 


Guod sacerdos orat oblationem panis et vini fieri corpus 
Domini et sanguinem Domini nostri Jesu Christi, primo 
factum est coenantibus discipulis, in his verbis a Christo 
prolatis: Hoc est corpus meum. Hic est calix sanguinis 
mei novi et aeterni testamenti. Sed priusquam sacerdos 
haec verba proferat, quod sequitur, praecedentibus con- 
tinuat dicens: Qui pridie quam pateretur accepit panem 
in sanctas ac venerabiles manus suas: et elevatis oculis 
in coelum, ad te Deum Patrem suum omnipotentem, tibi 
gratias agens, etc. Dum haec verba profert, sumit panem 
de altari, et elevatum facto signaculo crucis benedicit, 
et postea praetaxatis verbis Domini et repraesentatis, 
super corporale deponit. Deinde calicem tollit, et signans 
repraesentat verba Domini, dicens: Benedixit, dedit 
discipulis swis dicens: Accipite et bibite ex hoc ommes. 
Hic est calix sanguinis mei, etc. O insigne miraculum! 
O mirabile et divinissimum sacramentum! Quae mens 
non expaveat? Quis intellectus non deficiat? Omnis 
sensus hebescit, omnis ratio evanescit; prorsus dialecti- 
corum inquisitio absit; hoc sola fides probat et agnoscit, 
quia cibus hominum fit cibus angelorum. Quod sacerdos 
elevat, non deponit. Elevatum et depositum idem vi- 
dentur esse in specie, colore, et sapore: prorsus tamen 
aliud apparet, et aliud intrinsecus latet. Elevatus est de 
altari panis communis, deponitur caro Christi immortalis. 
Quod erat cibus animalis, factum est cibus spiritalis. 
Quod erat momentanea refectio hominum, factum est 


aeterna et indeficiens saturitas angelorum. 
P. L. elxxii., 1292-1293. 


Hugo of St. Victor. +1141 a.p. 
Speculum de Mysteriis Ecclesiae 
Latet homines et angelos quomodo verba et mystica 
signa crucis provehant dona oblata. Dum enim rogat 


392 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Dominum ut placatus oblationem aceipiat et quibusdam 
aliis interpositis rogat, ut dignetur facere oblationem 
benedictam, hoc est ut promoveat in melius, ascriptam, 
hoc est sibi propriam, ratam, hoc est ut sufficiens sit ad 
salutem, rationabilem et acceptabilem, hoc est ut ipse recte 
dividat et Dominum placare possit, rogat. Et hoc totum 
confertur in illis verbis Domini in coena prolatis quae 
sacerdos subjungit. Sed ea dieturus sic prius incipit: 
Qui pridie quam pateretur. ln his verbis sumit ab altari 
panem adhue communem et elevatum benedicit et signum 
crucis imprimit, et prius quam deponat repraesentat 
verba Domini dum dicit: Benedixit et jregit et quae sequun- 
tur. Postea tollit calicem et signat, et repraesentat verba 
Domini dicens: Et dedit discipulis suis dicens: Accipite 
et bibite ex hoc omnes. Hie fit illud insigne miraculum. 
In his verbis cibus carnis fit cibus animae. Per haee 
verba et per crucis signaculum novatur natura, et panis 
fit caro et vinum sanguis. Unde merito cum venitur ad 
haec verba in quibus tanta gratia datur, sacerdos tollit 
alte utrumque, significans hune cibum et hune potum 
excellentiorem caeteris. P. L. clxxvii., 370. 


Alger of Liege. fc. 1131 A.p. 

De Sacramentis Corporis et Sanguinis Dominici. Lib. I., Cap. xiv. 

Unde etiam sacerdos viee Christi corpus Dominicum 
in terreno altari conficiens nec tamen aliquid suis meritis, 
sed totum divinae potentiae et gratiae attribuens, orat 
in canone Deum Patrem dicens: Jube haec oblata tibi 
per manus et virtutem Filii tui, angeli tui, qui est angelus 
magni consilii, non in hoc humile et visibile altare ubi modo 
est, sed in sublime altare tuum, id est Filium tuum, quem 
usque ad dexteram tuam in conspectu majestatis tuae 
sublimasti, deferri; ut fiat nobis corpus et sanguis dilecti 
Fili tui: ostendens ipsum Filium, jussione Patris, in 
coelis esse offerentem, et hostiam, et id super quod offer- 
tur; quia omnino fidei et gratiae ejus innitimur, quod 


APPENDIX 393 


terrena corpora in Christum converti, ipsumque in coelesti- 
bus ad dexteram Patris sedentem, pro nobis interpellare, 


et in sacramento altaris consecrari et esse credimus. 
Ευ οκ, 781. 


Rupert of Deutz. {1198 a.p. 


Commentaria in Joannem. Lib. VI. 


Panis iste corporeus, postguam signaverit eum Pater, 
et vinum hoc expressum acinis praesentibus, mox ut eodem 
signo signatum est, per manus Ecclesiae dicentis: Ut 
nobis corpus et sanguis fiat dilectissime Filii tui Domini 
nostri Jesu Christi, etc., usque in mei memoriam [facietis : 


corpus et sanguis ejus qui hujus traditionis auctor est. 
P. L. elxix., 466. 


Peter Lombard. 71164 a.p. 
Sententiarum Libri IV. 
Lib. IV., dist. viii. 3. De forma 
Forma vero est quam ipse ibidem edidit dicens, Hoc est 
corpus meum, et post, Hic est sanguis meus. Cum enim 
haec verba proferuntur, conversio fit panis et vini in 
substantiam corporis, et sanguinis Christi, reliqua ad 
laudem Dei dicuntur. P. L. excii., 856. 


Lib. IV., dist. xiii. 1 


Quod etiam Augustinus (?) in sermone de corpore 
Christi, tradere videtur dicens: Recolite nomen, et ad- 
vertite veritatem. Missa enim dicitur, eo quod coelestis 
nuntius ad consecrandum vivificum corpus adveniat, 
juxta dictum sacerdotis dicentis: Omnipotens Deus, 
jube haec perferri per manus sancti angeli tui in sublime 
altare tuum, etc. Ideirco nisi angelus venerit, missa 
nequaquam jure vocari potest. Numquid enim si hoc 
mysterium haereticus ausus fuerit usurpare, angelum de 


coelo mittit Deus oblationem ejus consecrare ? 
P.I. οκση. 908. 


394 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Sicard, Bishop of Cremona. + 1215 a.p. 
Mitrale, seu, De Officiis Ecclesiasticis Summa. Lib. III., Cap. vi. 


Quam oblationem : hic accedit ad Domini consecrationem 
dicens: Quam oblationem, id est terrenam materiam ad 
corpus tui Filii destinatam, tu Deus quaesumus, in omni- 
bus; hoc est tota cogitatione, tota vita et toto intellectu, 


digneris jacere benedictam, id est Spiritu sancto replere. 
P. L. cexiii., 128. 


Qui pridie, id est priori die quam pateretur, accepit 
panem, benedixit, jregit, dedit discipulis, et ait: Accipite 
et manducate, hoc est corpus meum. Hoc tragicis gestibus 
quod littera sonat, exprimimus. P. L. cexiii., 128. 


Quod sacerdos panem levat, significat cibum esse eaeteris 


excellentiorem. Similiter de potu . . . unde et sacerdos 
hie ealieem deponit, sed non derelinquit, dicens: Hic 
est calix sanguinis met. P. L. cexiii., 129, 130. 


Dicente vero sacerdote: Per omnia saecula saeculorum, 


diaconus calicem sublevat . . . et post in altari deponit, 
et cum corporali cooperit oblatam et calicem. . . . sacer- 
dos qui oblatam elevat. P. L. cexiii., 134. 


Durandus, Bishop of Mende. + 1296 A.n. 


Rationale Divinorum Officiorum. Lib. IV., Cap. xliv. 


Possunt etiam secundo modo praemissa verba sic ex- 
poni: Omnipotens Deus, jube haec, scilicet panem et 
vinum, perferri, id est transmutari, in sublime altare tuum, 
id est in corpus et sanguinem filii tui, super choros ange- 
lorum exaltari, quia corpus Domini dictum est altare 
juxta illud: Altare de terra jacietis mihi, per manum 


sancti Angeli tui, id est per ministerium sacerdotis. 
Neapoli, 1859, p. 280. 


APPENDIX 395 


The Ancient Statutes of the Carthusians. ο. 1150 a.p. 
Part L, cap. 43, De officio sacerdotis, diaconi, et subdiaconi (Mar- 

tene, De Ant. Eccl. Rit., Lib. L, Cap. IV., Art. XII., Ordo XXV.). 

Dieta praefatione, inclinatur sacerdos ante faciem 
altaris, et dicit: Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, et cetera, 
Te igitur et cetera usque benedicas. "Tune erigit se, et 
facit cruces sicut dispositae sunt in missali. Ad Qui 
pridie quam pateretur, cum dicit: Accepit panem, accipit 
hostiam utraque manu, elevat parum, et suo loco benedicit. 
Si autem plures sint hostiae, dicendo Benedixit, uno sig- 
naculo signat tam ipsam quam tenet, quam ceteras. Dicto 
autem Hoc est Corpus meum, elevatur hostia, ita ut possit 
videri, et pulsatur campana uno ictu aut pluribus in missis 
tantum conventualibus. Porro in elevatione hostiae, si 
stantes oramus, ad terram prosternimur, sicut quando 
dicitur: Et homo factus est, nec surgimus donec calix depona- 
tur... . Ad Simili modo cum dicitur Accipiens et hunc 
praeclarum calicem, accipit calicem utraque manu, elevat 
parum, primum retractis paulisper corporalibus et restrictis 
inter digitos et oram calicis, ne decidant; dieto Gratias 
agens, deponit, sed manum sinistram non removet. Facta 
autem cruce ad Benedixit, iterum resumit utraque manu 
calicem, et elevat parum, elevatum tenet usque Unde 
et memores Domine. p. 228. 


Odonis Episcopi Parisiensis Synodicae Constitutiones. 
TAOT AD. 


Cap. V. 6. Frequenter moneantur laici, ut ubicumque 
viderint deferri corpus Domini, statim genua flectant tan- 
quam Domino et Creatori suo, et junctis manibus, quoad 
usque transierit, orent. Mansi, XXII, 678. 


Communia Praecepta Synodalia. 
28. Praecipitur presbyteris, ut eum in canone Missae 
incoeperint, Qui pridie, tenentes hostiam, ne elevent eam 
statim nimis alte, ita quod possit ab omnibus videri a 


396 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


populo, sed quasi ante pectus detineant, donec dixerint: 
Hoc est corpus meum: et tunc elevent eam, ut possit ab 
omnibus videri. Mansi, XXII., 682. 


Additiones Willelmi Parisiensis Episcopi ad Constitu- 
tiones Gallonis. 1208 a.p. 
XV. Ut elevatione corporis Christi campana pulsetur. 
Praecipitur, quod in celebratione Missarum, quando cor- 
pus Christi elevatur, in ipsa elevatione, vel paulo ante, 
campana pulsetur, sicut alias fuit statutum: ut sic mentes 
fidelium ad orationem excitentur. Mansi, XXII, 768. 


Constitutiones Ricardi Poore, Sarum Episcopi. c. 1217 A.n. 


XXXVII. Moneantur laici, quod reverenter se habeant 
in consecratione Eucharistiae, et fleetant genua: maxime 
in tempore illo, cum post elevationem Eucharistiae hostia 
sacra dimittitur. Mansi, XXIL, 1119. 


Honorii Papae III. ad Praelatos Hiberniae. 1219 a.p. 


Sacerdos vero quilibet frequenter doceat plebem suam, 
ut cum in celebratione missarum elevatur hostia salutaris, 
quilibet reverenter inclinet, idem faciens cum ipsam portat 
presbyter ad infirmum. Mansi, XXII., 1100. 


Concilium Oxoniense. 1222 A.p. 
Cap. XXIII. Quod archidiaconi in visitatione sua examinent sacer- 
dotes de canone Missae, et de sacramento altaris. 

Ut autem archidiaconi secundum Apostolum, non quae 
sua sunt quaerant, sed quae Jesu Christi, in sua visitatione 
provideant, ut canon Missae emendetur, si sint in eo 
defectus: et quod sacerdotes rite proferre noverint saltem 
verba canonis et baptismatis, et quod in hae parte sanum 
habeant intellectum. Mansi, XXII., 1159. 


Statuta Legenda in Concilio Oxoniensi. 1222 a.p. 
Edita per dom. Stephanum Langton : Cantuar. Archiepiscopum. 
Frequenter moneantur laici, ut ubieumque videant cor- 

pus Domini deferri, statim genua flectant tamquam 


ΑΡΡΕΝΡΙΧ 997 


creatori et redemptori suo, et junctis manibus, quousque 
transierit, orent humiliter, et hoc maxime fiat tempore 
consecrationis in elevatione hostiae guum panis in verum 
corpus Christi transformatur, et id, quod est in calice, 
in sui sanguinem mystica benedictione transformatur. 
Verba canonis missae, praesertim in his, quae ad substan- 
tiam sacramenti pertinent, plene et integre, et cum summa 
animi devotione proferantur. Mansi, XXII., 1175-1176. 


Concilium Provinciale Scoticum. 1225 Α.Ὀ. 
Statuta Generalia Ecclesiae Scoticanae 
LVIII. De Sacramento Eucharistiae. 


Item praecipimus, ut sacerdotes habeant canonem cor- 
rectum, et verba canonis in missa rotunde dicantur et 
distincte. 

LIX. De Celebratione Missarum. 

Hostiam vero non elevent antequam ista verba prae- 
dieantur: Hoc est corpus meum. Mansi, XXII., 1239. 


Concilium Trevirense Provinciale. 1227 a.p. 

III. Sequitur de Eucharistia. 

Corpus Domini cum campanula et lucerna, et luminibus 
honorifice, et decenter portetur infirmis, item doceantur 
laici a sacerdote genua flectere, pectus pungere, manus 
jungere, dum sacramentum Eucharistiae sic portatur ad 
infirmos. . . . ltem hostia ante transubstantiationis 
verba non elevetur ad populum. Mansi, XXIII, 27. 


Praecepta Antiqua seu Institutorum Synodalium dioe- 
cesis Rotomagensis a Sacerdotibus observandum opus- 
culum, etc. 1235 A.D. 

IX. Praecipitur Presbyteris ut quando inceperint in 
Canone Missae, Qui pridie, tenentes hostiam non elevent 
eam: sed ante pectus detineant, donec dixerint: Hoc est 
enim corpus meum. Et tune reverenter elevent eam et 
decenter, ita possit videri. Mansi, XXIII., 374. 


398 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Synodus Wigorniensis. 1240 Α.Ὀ. 
Constitutiones Walteri de Cantilupo Wigorniensis Episcopi 

VIII. Cum autem, in celebratione Missae, Corpus 
Domine per manus sacerdotum in altum erigitur, cam- 
panella pulsetur; ut per hoc devotio torpentium excitetur, 
ac aliorum caritas fortius inflammetur. Quod autem ἃ 
religiosis illis, quoad elevationem, ut videri possit ab 
astantibus observari praecipimus, qui non servaverunt, 
ut dicitur, hactenus hoc statutum. Mansi, XXIII., 528. 


Statuta Synodalia Walteris et Simonis Norwicensium 
Episcoporum. 1257 a.p. 


Sacerdos vero quilibet frequenter doceat plebem suam, 
ut cum in celebratione missarum elevatur hostia salutaris, 
se reverenter inclinet. Mansi, XXIII, 965. 


Concilium Provinciale Moguntinum. 1261 Α.Ὀ. 


Canon VI. Sacerdos vero quilibet plebem suam doceat 
diligenter, ut cum in celebratione missarum elevatur hostia 
salutaris, quilibet devote flectat genua sua, vel saltem 
se reverenter inclinet, idem faciens cum eam portat Pres- 
byter ad infirmum. Mansi, XXIII., 1082. 


Statuta Synodalia Claromontensis Ecclesiae. 1268 a.p. 

Capitula, Pars I., vi. Si vero per negligentiam evenit, 
quod perlecto canone, et peracta consecratione corporis 
nec vinum nec aqua reperiantur in calice, debet statim 
infundi in calice utrumque; et hostia sic consecrata 
seorsum reverenter observetur. Hostia nova, sicut nunc 
solet, ante calicem apponatur, et reincipiatur canon 
Missae, Te igitur. Post communionem vero, ante sump- 


tionem sanguinis, prior hostia ab ipso sacerdote sumatur. 
Mansi, XXIII., 1191. 


Et presbyteri, quando incipiunt in canone Missae. 
Qui pridie quam pateretur, hostiam non elevent; sed 
teneant ante pectus decenter, donec dixerint, Hoc est enim 


APPENDIX 399 


corpus meum: et tunc elevent eam, et elevatam tamdiu 
teneant, quod possit apte videri: et tunc pulsetur cam- 
pana. Hoc autem dietum est, ne purus panis adoretur: 
quod esset, si ante prolationem verborum istorum hostia 
elevaretur. Mansi, XXIII., 1191. 


Concilium Monasteriense in Westphalia. 1279 a.p. 


VIII. Praecipimus ut sacerdotes attente, reverenter, 
et distinete legant, et dicant in Canone, quae sunt dicenda: 
et expediant se, guantorcius poterunt, propter taedium 
astantium, et alia, quae occurrere possunt: et faciant 
signa sua distincte, et reverenter. ltem nullus Sacerdos 
elevet hostiam ad ostendendum populo, nisi postquam 
dixerit haec verba. Hoc est enim corpus meum: et pul- 
setur campana tribus vicibus, ut fideles qui audierint, 
ubicumque fuerint, adorent. 

Item, si Sacerdos cum venerit ad consecrationem san- 
guinis, vel etiam ad perceptionem, et nihil in calicem in- 
veniat, innuat, ut ei afferatur vinum, et aqua: dicat verba 
canonis ab illo loco: Simili modo, postquam coenatum,' 
usque ad finem, et faciat signa, quae fieri solent super san- 
guinem: illa autem, quae facta sunt super Eucharistiam, 


non reiteret, sed transeat consueto modo. 
Mansi, XXIV ., 314. 


Synodus Coloniensis. 1280 a.p. 

VII. De sacramento eucharistiae sive altaris. 

Item nullus sacerdos elevet hostiam ad ostendendum 
populo, nisi postquam dixerit haec verba: Hoc est enim 
corpus meum. Et pulsetur nola tribus ictibus ex una parte, 
ut fideles qui audierint, ubicumque fuerint, veniant et 
adorent. Mansi, XXIV., 350. 


! Note the more conservative and primitive idea of consecration 
expressed by the directions of the Council of Clermont, as com- 
pared with those of the Council of Munster. With the first com- 
pare the extract from Preparatio Sacerdotis, prefixed to a Roman 
Missal of 1493 (see below, p. 405), which bids the priest begin 
as far back as Hanc igitur under similar circumstances. 


400 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Synodus Exoniensis. 1287 A.p. 

IV. De Eucharistia. 

Quia vero per haec verba, hoc est enim corpus meum, et 
non per alia, panis transubstantiatur in corpus Christi: 
prius hostiam non levet sacerdos, donec ipsa plene pro- 
tulerit verba, ne pro Creatore, creatura a populo veneretur. 

Hostia autem ita levetur in altum, ut a fidelibus cir- 
cumstantibus valeat intueri; per hoc enim fidelium devotio 
excitatur, et fides meritum suscipit incrementum. Paro- 
chiani vero sollicite exhortantur, ut in elevatione corporis 
Christi, nedum reverenter inclinent, sed genua flectant, 
et Creatorem suum adorent, omni devotione et reverentia, 
ad quod per campanellae pulsationem primitus excitentur: 


et in elevatione ter tangatur campana major. 
Mansi, XXIV., 788. 


Ordo Romanus XIV. 1342-1552 a.p 
Mabillon, Mus. Ital., ii., p. 243 seq. 
Ordinarium Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae, auctore, ut videtur, Jacobo 
Gaietano cardinale 

LIII. ... Subsequenter manibus junctis inclinatus 
ante altare incipiat submissa voce, Te igitur, etc., et cum 
dicet, uti accepta habeas, erigat se, et osculetur altare in 
parte sinistra prope hostiam. Deinde prosequatur ipsum 
canonem, sieut in libro habetur, faciendo signum crucis 
super calicem et hostiam similiter, quando dicit, haec 
dona, et iterum quando dicit, haec munera, et iterum 
quando dicit, haec sancta sacrificia illibata. Cum autem 
dixerit, Memento Domine jamulorum jamularumque tuarum, 
subsistat modicum a prolatione verborum, et mente habeat 
coram Deo memoriam vivorum pro quibus orare intendit: 
et post paululum resumat illud, et omnium. circumstan- 
tium, ete. 

Cumque pervenerit ad illum locum, Quam oblationem, 
etc., faciat signum crucis super calicem et hostiam; 
similiter dicendo, benedictam, et iterum dicendo, ascrip- 


APPENDIX 401 


tam, et tertio dicendo, ratam, ete., et cum dicet, ut nobis 
corpus, faciat signum super hostiam tantum. Similiter 
cum dicit, sanguis, faciat crucem super calicem tantum: 
dicendo autem, dilectissimi? fili, ete., junetis manibus ad 
pectus suscipiat paulisper in altum. . Deinde dicendo, Qui 
pridie, etc., tergat paululum super corporale utriusque 
manus pollicem et indicem, et accipiat cum ipsis digitis 
hostiam; nec multum elevet super ipsum altare: dicendo 
autem, elevatis oculis in caelum, elevet ipsos oculos; et 
dicendo, benedixit, faciat cum dextra manu signum crucis 
super hostiam, quam teneat manu sinistra: quo facto, 
iterum teneat hostiam cum digitis utriusque manus, et 
proferat distincte ac devote verba consecrationis: quibus 
dietis, ipse primo adoret inclinato capite sacrum divinum 
corpus: deinde reverenter et attente ipsum elevet in altum 
adorandum a populo, et adoratam sacram hostiam deponet 
in loco suo. Et attendat quod ex tunc utriusque manus 
pollicem cum indice junctum teneat, nec disjungat ipsos 
digitos usque post communionem, nisi quando ipsum 
oportet contingere sacram hostiam, vel signa facere. 

Deposita hostia, ut dictum est, dicendo: Simili modo, 
etc., accipiat calicem ipsum discoopertum, ut prius teneat 
cum utraque manu paulisper elevatum super altare, et 
cum dicit, benedixit, deposito super altare calice, faciat 
super ipsum calicem crucem cum dextra manu, tenendo 
eum cum sinistra, quo facto, resumens cum utraque 
manu, et elevans paululum ab altare, prosequatur verba 
consecrationis usque ad illum locum, remissionem pecca- 
torum. Quibus finitis, inclinato paululum eapite adoret 
sacrum Domini sanguinem, et elevet adorandum a populo, 
ut supra de corpore dictum est. Nec oportet quod vel 
corpus, vel sanguinem diu teneat elevatum; sed post 
brevem moram deponat, ita tamen quod elevationes et 
depositiones faciat cum debita reverentia et maturitate. 
Deponendo autem calicem dicat haec verba: Haec quoties- 
cumque, etc. Deposito calice, et collocato in loco suo, 


402 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


elevatis manibus ut prius, prosequatur illud: Unde et 
memores, ete. Et cum dicet, hostiam puram, faciat sig- 
num crucis super calicem et hostiam simul; et iterum 
faciat dicendo hostiam sanctam, et iterum faciat dicendo, 
hostiam | immaculatam; et cum dicet, panem sanctum 
vitae aeternae, faciat signum super hostiam tantum. 
Similiter cum dicit, et calicem salutis perpetuae, faciat 
signum super calicem tantum. Cum autem dicet: Sup- 
plices te rogamus, etc., manibus cancellatis ante pec- 
tus, ita quod dextrum brachium sit supra sinistrum, in- 
clinet ante altare: et cum dicturus est: ex hac altaris 
participatione, etc., erigit se, et osculetur altare in sinistra 
parte prope hostiam. Subsequenter dicendo, sacrosanc- 
tum, ete., faciat signum crucis super hostiam, et aliud faciat 
super calicem dicendo, et sanguinem. Cumque dicet, 
omni benedictione, etc., signet faciem suam. Cum autem 
dixerit, Memento, etc., faciat memoriam pro defunctis, 
sieut superius de vivis dietum est. Et cum pervenerit 
ad illud, Nobis quoque peccatoribus, ete., dicendo, nobis, 
elevet paululum vocem sine nota, et percutiat pectus 
suum cum digitis dextrae manus, non polliee et indice, 
sed alis. Deinde prosequatur quae scripta sunt usque 
ad illum locum, per quem omnia, ete., et dicendo, sanctificas, 
faciat signum super calicem et hostiam similiter, et iterum 
faciat dicendo, vivificas, et tertio dicendo, benedicis. Post 
haec diaconus detegat calicem, amovendo corporale quod 
ipsum tegit, et ipsum calicem per pedem teneat firmum 
cum digitis dextrae manus: et tune idem Pontifex cum 
reverentia recipiat corpus Domini cum dextra manu, et 
faciat cum eo signum crucis super ora calicis a labio usque 
ad labium, dicendo, per ipsum; idem faciat signum paulu- 
lum juxta calicem, dicendo, et in ipso. Cumque dicet, 
est tibi Deo, etc., faciat eum eadem hostia signum crucis 
inter se et calicem contra labium calieis, et iterum faciat 
signum contra pedem ipsius calicis, dicendo, in unitate 
Spiritus sancti, ete. Quo facto, deponat ipsam hostiam 


APPENDIX 403 


in loco suo, et diaconus tegat cum corporali, ac osculetur 
altare et dextrum humerum Pontificis, et sic redeat ad 
locum suum post Pontificem. Pp. 304-306. 


Duns Scotus 


Quaestiones in Librum Quartum Sententiarum. Distinctio 8, g. 2 


Sed hie est dubium, utrum praetermissis verbis prae- 
cedentibus, per ista sola quatuor verba conficeret Sacerdos. 
Dieitur quod sie, gula ista sunt praecisa forma, alia sunt 
propter reverentiam, vel propter orationem praemittenda. 
Sed contra istud arguitur, quia verba sacramentalia ex 
vi verborum debent significare illud, quod efficitur, ex 
vi Sacramenti; sed ex vi consecrationis hujus efficitur 
ibi esse verum corpus Christi; ergo verba sufficientia ex 
vi propria debent significare illud ibi contineri. Sed haee 
verba: Hoc est corpus meum, prolata sine praecedentibus, 
hoe non significant absolute, quia ly meum significat referri 
ad personam ipsius loquentis, quia licet minister possit in- 
tendere, ut loquatur in persona Christi, non tamen propter 
hoe, significatum illorum verborum esset, quod ly meum 
demonstraret corpus Christi sed corpus loquentis. Sicut 
si Inciperem loqui in persona Christi, dicendo sic, mea 
doctrina est ista, sed intenderem loqui in persona Christi, 
tamen ex vi verborum non habetur quod ista doctrina sit 
Christi, sed ilius qui loquitur; sicut Angelus quando 
loquebatur in persona Dei: Ego sum Deus Abraham, et 
per eonsequens, non esset propositio falsa secundum sen- 
sum pro quo fieret; tamen non erat significatum proprie 
hujus orationis, quod ly ego supponeret pro persona Dei. 

Hoe etiam confirmatur per Ambrosium de consecrat. 
dist. 2. Panis est in altari: Sermo, inquit, Christi crea- 
turam mutat; et sequitur: Consecratio quibus verbis fit ? 
attendite, quae sunt verba: Accipite, εἰ edite ex hoc omnes, 
hoc est corpus meum. Ubi ipse videtur conjungere illa verba 
praecedentia, scilicet accipite, tanquam verba consecrati- 
onis. Sed hoc non est intelligendum tanquam sint essen- 


404 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


tialiter pertinentia ad necessitatem consecrationis, tan- 
quam necessario praemittenda; et non solum illa, sed alia 
plura praecedentia in canone, ex quibus ex vi sermonis 
haberi potest, quod ista; Hoc est corpus meum, dicuntur 
in persona Christi. Unde non sine causa Ecclesia ita 
connexit totum Canonem Missae, quod ab illo loco Com- 
municantes, usque ad illum locum post consecrationem: 
Supplices te rogamus, omnipotens Deus, non est aliqua 
oratio, quae non necessario connectatur cum praecedente, 
vel per conjunctionem copulativam, sicut: Hanc ergo 
oblationem, et hujusmodi, vel per pronomen infinitum, 
ut, Quam oblationem tu Deus, et Qui pridie quam pateretur, 
et post consecrationem: Supra quae propitio; vel per 
relationem, ut ibi: Simili modo. De isto articulo dicetur 


in generali simul cum dubiis, quid fuerit observandum. 
Pp. 36, 37, vol. xvii. Vrivks, Paris, 1891-1895. 


Quod ergo consilium? Dico, quod Sacerdos inten- 
dens facere' quod facit Ecclesia, legens distincte verba 
Canonis a principio usque ad finem, vere conficit; nec 
est tutum alieui se reputare valde peritum de scientia 
sua, et dicere: Volo uti praecise istis verbis pro consecra- 
tione sanguinis; sed securior est simplicitas: Volo ista 
verba proferre sub ea intentione, sub qua Christus insti- 
tuit ea esse proferenda, ut quae ex Christi institutione sunt 
de forma, dico ut de forma, et quae ad reverentiam, ad 
reverentiam. 

Sed quid si ante omnia verba prolata contingeret mori 
Sacerdotem, numquid habendus esset sanguis tanquam 
vere consecratus? Dico hie, sicut in quodam casu su- 
perius praemisso, si quis Sacerdos incipieret sic loqui: 
Hoc est corpus meum, non praedicens verba praemissa 
totaliter, quod omnibus talibus non est adorandum nisi 


sub eonditione, si vere consecratum est. 
Pp. 51, 52, vol. xvii. VrvEs, Paris, 1891-1895. 


APPENDIX 405 


Preparatio Sacerdotis 


Missale Romanum, Venetiis, 1498 


Restat inquirere de omissionibus vel negligentijs que 
circa missam solent contingere gualiter de huiusmodi sit 
agendum. . .. Si ante verba transubstantiationis scili- 
cet Hic est calix. celebrans hoc perpenderit debet mitti 
vinum si solum omissum fuerit vel utrumgue si fuerit 
omissum et ita procedat in consecratione. Si vero post 
verba transubstantiationis et quasi cum ventum est ad 
sumptionem hoc perpenderit quia apud aliquos magistros 
dubium est utrum confectio in una specie possit fieri sine 
confectione in alia specie: licet plures non dubitent quin 
bene fiat et possit fieri: ponat hostiam illam in sequestri 
altaris eum magna reverentia: et in fine misse sumatur 
a ministro vel ab alio ad hoc preparato: premissaque 
confessione sacerdos ministret denuo panem et vinum 
et aquam: si aqua in calice non fuerit et reincipiat ab 
illo loco eanonis scilicet: Hanc igitur oblationem, «c. 

... Si ante transubstantiationem effusa fuerit pars 
vini aliqua: mutetur palla sub silentio: et sie celebrans 
officium prosequatur. 

Si totum effusum fuerit: mutatis lintheaminibus 
ministret denuo et reincipiat ab Hanc igitur premissa 
tamen confessione. 

Si post transubstantiationem effusa fuerit pars sanguinis : 
nihilominus celebrans offieium prosequatur. Si totum 
quod nihil omnino remanserit: quod est valde difficile 
ponat super propitiatorium et ministret denuo panem et 
vinum et aquam: et reincipiat ab Hanc 4gitur. Confes- 
sione premissa: et sumatur prima hostia a ministro vel 


ab infirmo: vel ab alio ad hoc parato. 
Tracts on the Mass, p. 116.! 


1 This tract is also found in other later editions of the Roman 
Missal. See Dr. Wickham Legg's Introduction, pp. xxiv-xxv. 


406 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Ordo Missae 
John Burckard, Rome, 1502 


Qui pridie quam pateretur. accipit cum pollice et indice 
dextre manus hostiam: et eam cum illis: ac pollice et 
indice etiam sinistre manus tenens: stans erectus ante 
medium altaris dicit. 

accepit panem: m sanctas ac venerabiles manus suas 
Elevat ad deum oculos: et sine mora demittit dicens. 

et elevatis oculis in celum ad te deum patrem suum om- 
nipotentem : libi gratias agens. 

tenet hostiam inter pollicem et indicem sinistre manus: 
et dextra producit semel signum Crucis super eam 
dicens. 

benekdixit fregit. deditque. discipulis suis dicens: Ac- 
cipite et manducate ex hoc omnes. 

discooperit manu dextera calicem seu vas aliarum hos- 
tiarum: sl sit et cubitis super altare positis: stans in- 
clinato eapite: verba conseerationis distincte secrete: 
et reverenter profert super hostiam et simul super omnes: 
si plures sunt consecrande: et hostiam suam tantum pol- 
licibus et indicibus tenet dicens. 

Hoc est enim corpus meum. 

His dietis celebrans hostiam inter pollices et indices 
super altare tenens; reliquis manuum digitis extensis ac 
binis et binis simul iunctis: et ceteris hostijs si sunt plures 
consecrate in loco in quo a principio misse sunt posite super 
corporali: vel in alio calice sive vase dimissis genuflexus 
eam adorat: Tum se erigit elevat in altum quantum com- 
mode potest hostiam: et populo ostendit reverenter ado- 
randam: et moxipsam veneranter super Corporale reponit 
unde eam levavit: et polliees ae indices non disiungit 
usque post communionem: nisi quando hostiam conse- 
cratam tangere vel tractare debet et infra dicetur. Tum 
usque in terram genuflexus hostiam ipsam veneratur: 
et calicem seu vas aliarum hostiarum si sit: sua patena 


APPENDIX 407 


cooperit. . . . Deinde celebrans discooperit Calicem: 
et polliees ac indices super illius labium aliquantulum 
tergit: et eos iterum iungit: et stans erectus dieit 
secrete. 

Simili modo posteaquam cenatum est. 

Ambabus manibus accipit Calicem iuxta nodum infra 
cuppam Calicis: illum aliquantulum elevat: et sine mora 
reponit in eundem locum de quo eum levavit: super 
Corporale: interim prosequens. 

accipiens et hunc preclarum calicem in sanctas ac vener- 
abiles manus suas item tibi gratias agens. 

tenet Calicem manu sinistra per nodum infra Cuppam: 
dextra vero signando super eum dicit. 

Bener[«dixit: deditque discipulis suis dicens. ^ Accipite 
et bibite ex eo omnes. 

Accipit ambabus manibus Calicem videlicet cum 
sinistra pedem: cum dextera vero nodum infra cuppam 
Calieis: et cubitis super Altare positis: stans inclinato 
capite: super Calicem secrete: distincte: et reverenter 
verba consecrationis profert dicens. 

Hic est enim calix sanguinis mei novi et eterní testamenti 
misterium fidei: qui pro nobis et pro multis effundetur in 
remissionum peccatorum. 

reponit Calicem super Corporale dicens secrete. 

Hoc quotienscumque feceritis: in mei memoriam facietis. 

Et genuflexus sanguinem reverenter adorat: tum se 
erigit: accipit calicem discoopertum cum sanguine amba- 
bus manibus ut prius; elevat eum quantum commode 
potest: illum populo ostendens adorandum: et mox ipsum 
reverenter reponit super corporale: in locum solitum: 
et manu dextera ipsum palla cooperit: et genuflexus 
sacramentum veneratur. 

Tum celebrans ut prius ante altare extensis manibus 
ante pectus more consueto dicit secrete. 


Unde et memores. 
Tracts on the Mass, pp. 156-158. 


405 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Indutus Planeta 


Missale Romanum, F. Fradin, Lugduni, 1507 
De inelinationibus 


Item nota quod primo inclinat se sacerdos ante gradum 
altaris in confessione ut predictum est. 

. . . Quarto cum dicit Te igitur. 

Quinto cum dicit Supplices te rogamus omnipotens deus. 

. . . Et sciendum quod iste inclinationes profunde fiunt 
coram altari. Sunt etiam alie inclinationes que fiunt 
mediocriter super altare. 

... Septima post consecrationem hostie antequam 


elevetur. 
Tracts on the Mass, p. 182. 


Cum vero perventum est ad Qui pridie. ductis 
plane digitis super pallam altaris accipit ibi ostiam dicens. 
Accepit panem. Et parum elevans signat eam dicens. 
Benedicit. Et dieto Hoc est corpus meum. Et adorato 
corpore domini cum mediocri inclinatione elevat illud 
reverenter ita quod a circunstantibus possit videri: postea 
deponit in loco suo. Deinde coopertum calicem accipit 
cum duabus manibus et parum elevat dicens.  Accipi- 
ens εἰ hunc preclarum calicem etc. Deponit iterum super 
altare dicens. Jtem tibi gratias agens. Deinde signat 
dicens. Benedicit. Et iterato elevans dicit. Accipite 
et bibite etc. usque in mei commemorationem facietis. 


Deinde deposito calice dicit. Unde et memores. 
Tracts on the Mass, p. 186. 


Directorium Divinorum Officiorum, 
Ludovieus Ciconiolanus, Rome, 1539 
De quibusdam inclinationibus 
Decreveram nihil de inelinationibus agere cum in ordi- 
nario de eis tractetur. Sed cum multos videam sacerdotes 
post consecrationem quoties opus fuerit, parum tanto 
domino inelinari, non possum non gravato, mestoque 


APPENDIX 409 


ferre animo. Si temporalibus dominis magna exhibetur 
reverentia quanto longe maior eterno, universalique 
domino exhiberi debet? Ideo genuflexiones post con- 
secrationem profundissime fieri condecet. Loquor sanis, 


et iuvenibus, non egrotis, et senibus. 
'Traets on the Mass, p. 215. 


Roman Missal, Paris, Iolande Bonhomme, 
Widow of Thielmann Kerver, 1555 

Rubries of Qui pridie: 

Before F 1: Cum autem perventum fuerit ad Qui pridie 
quam pateretur ductis plane digitis super 
pallam, accipit hostiam in manibus, 
dicendo. accepit panem etc. et illam utra- 
que manu tenens inter pollices et indices 
dicendo et elevatis sursum elevat oculos, 
et signat hostiam, dicens benedixit. 

Before F 43: Et adorato corpore domini eum mediocri 
inclinatione, elevat ilud reverenter: et 
postea illud in loco suo reponit. Deinde 
dicens Simili modo postquam | cenatum 
est, discooperit calicem: et eum utraque 
manu accipiens, parum elevat, dicens, 
Accipiens et hunc preclarum ete. Re- 
ponit iterum super altare, dicens. Item 
ibi gratias agens, et sinistra manu tenens 
ipsum, dextera signat, dicens Benedixit 
et iterum utraque manu calicem ipsum 
parum elevans, dicit Accipite etc. usque 
memo. facietis. 

After F 102: Postea cum mediocri inclinatione adorato 
preciosissimo sanguine xpi, utraque manu 
calicem ipsum reverenter elevat cooper- 
tum. Postea reponit in loco suo. Et geni- 
bus in terram positis junetis manibus, et 
inclinato capite, dominicum corpus et 


410 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


sanguinem reverenter adorat. Deinde 
surgens extensis aliguantulum brachiis: 
dieit Unde et memo. 


Roman Missal. 1575 
(Antverpiae excudebat Christophorus Plantinus) 
Rubries of the Canon: 
Before A 1: Sacerdos extendens et jungens manus, 
elevans ad caelum oculos et statim de- 
mittens, inclinatus ante altare dicit. 


Before A 16: Osculatur altare. 

Before A 21: Signet ter super oblata. 

Before A 29: Extensis manibus prosequitur. 

Before Β 1: Commemoratio pro vivis. 

Before B 6: N. jungit manus, orat aliquantulum pro 


quibus orare intendit: deinde extensis 
manibus prosequitur. 

Before C 1: Infra actionem. 

Before C 77: Jungit manus. 

Before D 1: Tenens manus extensas super oblata dicit. 

Before D 35: Jungit manus. 

Before E 8: Signat ter super oblata. 

Before E 15: Signat semel super hostiam, et semel super 
calicem. 

Before F 5: Accipit hostiam. 

Before F 13: Elevat oculos ad caelum. 

Before F 26: Signat super hostiam. 

Before F 38: Tenens ambabus manibus hostiam, profert 
verba consecrationis distincte, secrete, 
et attente. 

Before F 43: Prolatis verbis consecrationis, statim hos- 
tiam consecratam genuflexus adorat: 
surgit, ostendit populo: reponit super 
corporale, iterum adorat: et non dis- 
jungit pollices et indices, nisi quando 
hostia tractanda est, usque ad ablutionem 
digitorum. Tune detecto calice dicit. 


Before 
Before 


Before 


Before 


Before 


Before 
Before 


Before 
Before 
Before 
Before 


Before 
Before 
Before 


Before 


Before 


Before 


Before 
Before 
Before 


Witere 1; 4: 


23: 
Bar 
36: 


APPENDIX 411 


: Ambabus manibus aceipit calicem. 
: Sinistra tenens calicem, dextera signat super 


eum. 


: Profert verba consecrationis super calicem, 


tenens illum parum elevatum. 


: Prolatis verbis consecrationis, deponit 


calicem super corporale, et genuflexus 
adorat: surgit et ostendit populo: dicens. 


: Deponit, cooperit, et iterum adorat. 


Deinde disjunetis manibus dicit. 


: Signat ter super hostiam et calicem simul. 
: Signat semel super hostiam, et semel super 


calicem. 


: Extensis manibus prosequitur. 

: Profunde inclinatus junctis manibus dicit. 
: Osculatur Altare. 

: Signat semel super hostiam, et semel super 


calicem. 


: Seipsum signat. 
: Commemoratio pro Defunctis. 
: N. jungit manus, orat aliquantulum pro his 


Defunetis pro quibus orare intendit: 
deinde extensis manibus prosequitur. 


: Pereutit pectus, elata parum voce dicens. 
: Signat ter super hostiam et calicem simul 


dicens. 


: Diseooperit calicem, genuflectit, accipit 


Saeramentum dextera, tenens sinistra 
calicem: signat cum hostia a labio ad 
labium calicis dicens. 
Bis signat inter pectus et calicem. 
Elevans parum calicem cum hostia dicit. 
Reponit hostiam, cooperit calicem, genu- 
flectit, surgit et dicit. 
Jungit manus. 
Pp. 289-294. 


412 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


The Sarum Customary. End of Fourteenth Century 


Chapter 66, $ 28 


Rubries of D, E, and F: 
Before D 1: Hic respiciat sacerdos hostiam cum magna 


Before E 1: 
Before F 1: 


Before F 


bo 
H> 


Before F 
Before F 43: 


bo 
00 


veneracione dicens. 


Hic iterum respiciat hostiam dicens. 
Hie erigat sacerdos manus et conjungat, 


et postea tergat digitos et elevet hostiam 
dicens. 


: Hie inclinet se et postea elevet paululum 


dicens. 


: Hie tangat hostiam dicens. 
Et! debent ista verba proferri cum uno 


spiritu et sub una prolacione, nulla pausa- 
cione interposita: post hec verba inclinet 
se sacerdos ad hostiam et postea elevet 
eam supra frontem, ut possit a populo 
videri et reverenter reponat illud super 
corporalia ante calicem in modum crucis 
per eandem facte. [Εὖ tunc discooperiat 
calicem] et teneat inter manus suas; non 
disjungendo pollicem ab indice, nisi dum 
facit benedicciones tantum, ita dicens. 


Before F 61: Hic inclinet se sacerdos dicens. 


Before F 74 


: Hie elevet [sacerdos] parumper calicem 


dicens. 


Before F 96: [Hic elevet calicem usque pectus vel ultra 


capud dicens.] 


After F 102: Hic reponat calicem . . . et elevet brachia 


in modum crucis ete. 
Frere, The Use of Sarum, vol. i., pp. 80-81. 


1 N.B. In the 1554 edition of the Sarum Manual the rubric 
before F 43 reads: Et debent ista verba . . . inclinet se sacerdos ad 
hostiam et capite inclinato illam adoret et postea, etc. 


APPENDIX 413 


Andreas Bodenstein von Carlstadt. Kirchen-Ordnung für 
Wittenberg. 1522 


. . . Item die messen sóllen nit anderst gehalten werden, 
dann wie si Christus am abentessen hat eingesetzt, doch 
umb etlicher sachen umbs glauben willen lasset man 
singen de tempore, und nit de sanctis, und singet introitum, 
kyrieleison, gloria in excelsis, et in terra, collecta, oder 
preces, epistel, gradualia, on sequens, evangelium, credo, 
offertorium, prefatio, sanctus, on canonen maior und 
minor, dieweil die geschrift nit gemess seind. Darnach 
vacht an das evangelisch mal; sein communicanten, so 
consecriert der priester, seind si nit da, so consecriert er 
und summiert es, hat er anders andacht darzu, darnach 
concludiert er mit der collecten, on ite missa est. Es 
mag auch der communicant die consecrierten hostien in 
die hand nemen, und selbs in den mund schieben, der- 


gleichen auch den kelch, und daraus trinken. 
(SgmLinG, Die Evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des X VI. Jahrhun- 
derts, L, 1, p. 698.) 


Item die messe sall nicht anders gehalten werden, 
dan wie sie Christus eingesetzt hat, durch etliche krangken 
im glauben derhalben lest man nach singen Introitum, 
Kyrieelyson, Et in terra, Epistel, Gradual ane Sequenz, 
Evangelium, Credo ane opfer, Sanctus. Auch lest man 
beide Canones aussen, dweil sie der schrift nit gemess 
seindt. Hienach fahet man an zu predigen die evan- 
gelische messe. Seint Communicantes, sso cosecriert 
man. Es magk auch der Priester sumieren ap er will. 


(Ibid., note 2, pp. 697-698. "The ** Roth’schen ’’ MS. of the above.) 
Lyndwood's Provinciale 
Lib. I., Tit. 10 in verbum Canon Missae 


De hoc canone habes extra. de celeb. miss. c. cum Marthae. 
in prin. Ubi dicit Hosti. quod Canon Missae accipitur 
pro illis verbis Christi, quibus fit Transubstantiatio panis 


414 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


in corpus, et vini in sanguinem. Licet quidam simplices 
sacerdotes intelligant Canonem, quiequid est in secreto 
missae; et striete intelligendo Canonem, puto quod 
Hostiensis dieit verum. Est namque Canon idem quod 
regula. 3. di. Canon. Missa vero proprie dieitur Eucharis- 
tiae consecratio. Alia autem omnia, quae vel sacerdos 
dicit, vel chorus canit, gratiarum actiones sunt, vel certe 
obsecrationes. de conse. di. 2. utrum. in fi. Unde Canon 
Missae vere dicitur regula illa, per guam Eucharistia 
consecratur; hoc est, illorum verborum per quae panis in 


corpus, et vinum in sanguinem transubstantiantur. 
P. 49, Oxford, 1679. 


Martin Luther 


Formula missae et communionis pro ecclesia Wittembergensi, 1523 


. . . Octavo, sequitur tota illa abominatio, cui servire 
coactum est quiequid in missa praecessit, unde et offerto- 
rium vocatur. Et abhinc omnia fere sonant ac olent 
oblationem. In quorum medio verba illa vitae et salutis 
sie posita sunt ceu olim area domini in templo idolorum 
iuxta Dagon. Et nullus est ibi Israelita, qui vel accedere 
vel aream reducere possit, donec ipsa hostes suos in pos- 
teriora percussos opprobrio sempiterno nobilitavit et 
sese dimittere compulit, quae est parabola instantis tem- 
poris. Proinde omnibus illis repudiatis quae oblationem 
sonant, cum universo canone, retineamus, quae pura et 
saneta sunt, ac sic missam nostram ordiamur. 

. II. Apparato pane et vino mox procedatur ad 
hune modum: “ Dominus vobiscum, respon.: “Et cum 
spiritu tuo. ‘Sursum corda, respon.: “ Habeamus ad 
dominum, (Gratias agamus domino deo nostro. Re- 
spon.: (dignum et iustum est. Vere dignum et iustum 
est, equum et salutare, nos tibi semper et ubique gratias 
agere, domine sancte, pater omnipotens, aeterne deus, 
per Christum dominum nostrum." 

III. Deinde: ‘Qui pridie quam pateretur, accepit 


APPENDIX 415 


panem gratias agens, fregit deditque discipulis suis dicens: 
Accipite, comedite, hoc est corpus meum, guod pro vobis 
datur. 

‘Similiter et calicem, postquam caenavit, dicens: Hic 
calix est novi testamenti in meo sanguine, qui pro vobis 
et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. Hoc 
quotiescunque feceritis, in mei memoriam faciatis." 

Haee verba Christi velim modica post prefationem 
interposita pausa in eo tono vocis recitari, quo canitur alias 
oratio dominiea in canone, ut à circumstantibus possit 
audiri, quamquam in his omnibus libertas sit plis mentibus, 
vel silenter vel palam ea verba recitare. 

IV. Finita benedictione Chorus cantet Sanctus et sub 
cantu Benedictus elevetur panis et calix, ritu hactenus 
servato, vel propter infirmos, qui hac repentina huius 
insignioris in missa ritus [mutatione] forte offendentur, 
praesertim ubi per conciones vernaculas docti fuerint, 
quid ea petatur elevatione. 

V. Post haec legatur oratio dominica. 


(SEHLING, Die Evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI Jahr- 
hunderts, 1., 1, pp. 5-6.) 


Von der Euangelischen Messz. Mit schönen Christ- 
lichen Gebetten vor vnd nach der empfahung des Sacra- 
ments. Durch Caspar Kantz von Nördlingen. 1522. 

(Die evangelischen deutschen Messen bis zu Luthers Deutscher 
Messe von D. Julius Smend, Göttingen, 1896, pp. 38-41, 72-94.) 

[p. 75.] Prefation oder vorred der Mesz: Erhebt ewer 
herzen zu Gott und laszt uns danksagen Gott unserm 
herren; denn das ist billich und recht. Ja warlich ist es 
billich und recht, auch heylsam, das wir an allen orten und 
zu aller zeyt dir, herr, heyliger vatter, allmechtiger, ewiger 
Gott, danksagen durch Christum, unsern herren. Durch 
welchen alle engel und die himmelischen krefte anbetten, 
eeren und loben dein herrliche majestat. Mit den selbigen, 
bitten wir, wöllest zulassen und annemen unsere stimm, 


410 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


das wir dich auch loben und sprechen on ende: Sanctus: 
heyliger, heyliger, heyliger herre Gott Sabaoth; voll 
seind hymmel und erd deiner herlichkeit. "Osanna in den 
höchsten, gebenedeyt sey, der da kompt in dem namen 
des herren. Glück und heyl in den höchsten. ) 

Nun hebt sich erst die Evangelisch Mesz an. 

O aller gütigister vatter, barmherziger, ewiger Gott, 
hilf, das dises brot und der wein uns werde und sey der 
warhaftig leib und das unschuldig blut deines allerliebsten 
suns, unsers herren Jhesu Christi. Welcher an dem tag 
vor seynem leyden nam das brot in seine heiligen hende, 
sah auf gen hymmel zu dir, seinem allmechtigen vatter, 
saget dank, segnet und brach das brot, und gab es seinen 
jüngern, sprechende: 

Nement hyn und essent. Das ist mein leyb, der für euch 
geben wirt. Des gleichen nach dem abentmal, nam er 
den kelch in sein heilige hend, danket, segnet und gab 
jn seinen jüngern und sprach: Nement hyn und trinkent 
alle daraus. Das ist der keleh des newen und ewigen 
testaments in meinem blut, das für euch und für vil ver- 
gossen wirt zu vergebung der sünden. Als oft jr das thut, 
so thuts in meiner gedechtnis. 

[p. 76.] Laszt uns betten: Vatter unser, der du bist 
im hymmel, etc. 


Eyne Evangelysce Misse: myt etlyke schone gebede / 
vm eynen wech to wysen//denen die noch Kinder synt 
in Christo. Myt wodanen geloue vnde manire men eyne 
rechte Euangelische Misse be hoert to holden. Bremen. 
Anno. MCCCCCX XV. 


Hier hevet sick erst de Evangelische Misse an. 
Eyn gebet voran to Gade. 
O Aldergnedigeste vader, barmhertige, ewige Got, giff 
uns dat wy vast gelowen, dat dit brot unde wyn wert 
dat waraftige lyf unde blot dynes alderlevesten sones, 


APPENDIX 417 


unses heren Jesu Christi. Welker an deme dage vor synem 
lydent nam dat brot in syne hilligen hande, sach up to 
dem hemmel to dy, synem almechtigen vader, sede dank 
unde brak dat brot unde gaf dat synen iungeren sprekende: 

Nemet hen unde etet; dat is myn licham, dat vor iuw 
gegewen wert. Des gelyken na dem aventmael nam he 
den kellick in syne hillige hande, dankede synen vader unde 
gaf synen iungeren unde sprak : 

Nemet hen unde drinket alle darut. Dat is de kellick 
des nygen unde ewigen testamentes in mynen blode, dat 
vor iuw un vor vele vorgaten wert to vorgevinge der sun- 
den. So vaken alse gy dat doet, so doet dat in myne 
gedechtenisse. 

Dat Vader unse. 

Lat uns bidden: 

Unse vader, de du bist in den hemmel, etc. — [Smend, op. 
cit., pp. 91-92.] 


Ordenung vnd ynnhalt Teutscher Mesz vnd Vesper / 
So yetsund im gebrauch haben Euangelisten vnd Christ- 
lichen Pfarrherren zü Strassburg. Mit etlichen Neüwen 
geschrifftlichen Introit, Gebet /Vorred oder Prefation 
vnd Canon /vor vnd nach vffhebung des Sacraments / 
auch andren ordenungen //in vorigem büchlin nit be- 
griffen. [1524.] 


Wir bitten auch dich, o du aller gütigster vatter und 
barmherziger, ewiger Gott, das du uns helfest, das dises 
brot und der weyn uns werde und sei der warhaftig leyb 
und das unschuldig blut deyns aller liebstens suns, unsers 
herren Jesu Christi. 

Hie facht an die recht, Christlich Mesz. 
Wölcher am nechsten tag vor seym leyden das brot nam, 
etc. 

(Smend, op. eit., pp. 132, note 7, and 133, note 3. Also given in 


Die Strassburger liturgischen Ordnungen im Zeitalter der Reforma- 
tion . . . von Friedrich Hubert, Göttingen, 1900, p. 68, col. 2.) 


418 THE CONSECRATION «ΟΕ THE EUCHARIST 


Kirchenordnung Wie es mit der Christlichen Lehre / 
heiligen Sacramenten /vnd allerley andern Ceremonien / 
in meines gnedigen herrn// Herrn Otthainrichen / Pfaltz- 
graven bey Rhein / Hertzogen inn Nidern vnd Obern 
Bairn, ete. Fürstenthumb gehalten wirt. 1543. 

(Colophon, fol. 86 r.) Gedruckt zu Nürenberg durch 
Johan Petreium Anno M.D.XLIII. 


(Fol. 26 r.) 

Nach dieser vermanung / soll der Priester vber die Hostien 
J vnd den Kelch /die nach anzal vnd gelegenheit der Per- 
sonen/so zum heyligen Sacrament gehn wôllen αι] den 
Altar verordnet sein sollen /dises nachjolgendes Ge[be]t 
sprechen. 

Gebet 

Herr Iesu Christe /du eyniger warer Son des lebendigen 
Gottis / der du dein leib fur vns alle in den bittern tod 
hast dargeben /vnd dein blut zu vergebung vnserer sünde 
vergossen / Darzu den selben dein leib//vnd dasselbig 
dein blut /allen deinen Iungern zu essen vnd zu trincken / 
vnd deines tods darbey zu gedencken hast befolhen. Wir 
bringen fur deine Gôtliche Maiestat//dise deine gaben, / 
Brot vnd Wein//vnd bitten//du wöllest die selben / 
dureh dein Gótliche gnad /gite /vnd krafft /heiligen / 
segnen/vnd schaffen /das dises Brot /dein leib /vnd 
diser Wein /dein blut sey /vnnd allen denen /die dar- 
von essen vnd trincken / zum ewigen leben lassen gedeihen 
/ der du mit Got dem vatter in eynigkeyt des heyligen 
geysts/lebst vnd regirest ymmer vnd ewiglich Amen. 


Also bald nach disem Gebet “sol er anfahen die verba 
Consecrationis zu singen “oder mit lauter wolvernemlicher 
stimme zu sprechen /wie er andre gesang vormals gesungen 
oder gesprochen hat/ wie hernach folge. Vnd sol sich 
fleissen das seine geberd /mit den worten sich vergleichen: 
das ist wann er singt, Nam er das Brot /so sol er auch 


APPENDIX 419 


die grossen Hostien nemen /vnd seiner brust gleich halten / 
bisz die wort volendet sein. Deszgleichen wenn er singt 
Nam er den Kelch /sol er mit dem Kelch auch also thun / 
wie vorgemelt ist. 

(Fol. 26 v.) 

Unser Herr Iesus in der nacht da er verrathen ward 
/fnam er das brot /dancket /vnd brachs /vnd gabs sein 
Jungern /und sprach: Nembt hin und esset. Das ist 
mein leib / der für euch gegeben wirt /das thut zu meinem 
gedechtnis. : 

Hie sol er die grossen Hostia mit geneygtem haupt auff- 
heben / vnd dem volck zaigen. 

Darnach auch den Kelch nemen /vnd halten /bisz er die 
volgenden wort singt “oder spricht. 

(Bol. 27 T.) 

Desselben gleichen nam er auch den Kelch /nach dem 
Abendmal / vnd dancket /vnd gab in den /vnd sprach: 
Trinckt alle daraus. Das ist mein blut des newen Testa- 
ments / das fur euch vnd fur vil vergossen wird /zu verge- 
bung der sünden. Solchs thut /so ος jr trinekt /zu 
meinem gedechtnis. i 

Hie sol er den Kelch auch auffheben / vnd den volck zaigen. 


Antididagma, seu Christianae et Catholicae religionis 
per Rever. et Illust. Dominos Canonicos Metropolitanae 
Eeclesiae Coloniensis propugnatio, adversus librum guen- 
dam universis Ordinibus seu Statibus Dioecesis eiusdem 
nuper bonae titulo Reformationis exhibitum, ac postea, 
mutatis quibusdam, Consultoriae deliberationis nomine 
impressum. 

Sententia item Delectorum per venerabile capitulum 
Ecclesiae Coloniensis, de vocatione Martini Buceri. 


Parisiis 
Apud Iacobum Kerver via ad divum Iacobum sub in- 
signi duorum gallorum. 1545. 


420 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


(The original sent to their Archbishop Herman by 
the chapter, Saturday, February 3, 1543.) 


(Fol. 103 v.) De Consecratione Eucharistiae, et tertio 
Missae Sacrificio. 

Completo sacrificio laudis quod pro statu totius mundi 
offertur, sequitur praecipuum missae caput, quod est 
consecratio divinissimi sacramenti. . . . In hae conse- 
eratione sacerdos Ecclesiae nomine per invocationem 
Dei, quae eius promissione, et mandato filii sui, tota in- 
nititur, suppliciter orat, ut Deus propositam illam panis 
et vini mixti oblationem, quae iam in signum totalis nos- 
trae deditionis et gratiarum actionis oblata est conse- 
quenter in omnibus benedictam, adscriptam, ratam, 
rationabilem, acceptabilemque facere dignetur, ut nobis 
corpus et sanguis fiat domini nostri Iesu Christi. Ac mox 
pronunciat sacerdos Evangelistarum verba: QUI PRIDIE 
quam pateretur et caetera. Quibus statim divina Christi 
verba subjungit, quorum virtute dignissimum et sacratis- 
simum illud eorporis et sanguinis sacramentum conse- 
eratur et efficitur: HOC EST CORPUS MEUM una cum 
aliis divinis verbis, quae super calicem proferuntur. . . . 

(Fol. 117 v.) An sine Prece Canonica Ecclesiae conse- 
cratur Sacramentum. 

Hie postulat necessitas ut indicemus vehementem 
prorsus insaniam esse, quod nunc quidam arbitrantur se 
consecrare Sacramentum corporis et sanguinis Christi, 
sine catholica prece quem canonem appellamus, et absque 
invocatione nominis divini, super dona proposita, sed tan- 
tum recitatione seu lectione verborum Pauh. 1. Cor. 11. 
Dominus lesus in qua nocte tradebatur, etc. Quum 
Apostolus illie solum historice (fol. 118 r.) narret facta, 
quae Christus gessit: non autem ut formam aliquam con- 
secrandi tradat, qua sacerdos Ecclesiae minister, cum in- 
vocatione nominis divini proposita dona benedicat et 


APPENDIX 421 


sanctificet, non utique suis, sed omnipotentibus domini 
nostri lesu Christi verbis. 
* * * * x x * 

Nee est difficile istud in re simili, aliorum Sacrament- 
orum formis evincere. Christus docuit Apostolos bap- 
tizare, dicens: Ite et baptizate omnes gentes, In nomine 
patris, et filii, et spiritus sancti. Quis autem tam obtuso 
est sensu, ut ausit dicere, sacerdotem, qui recitat aut legat 
verba Evangelii de instituto baptismo, non autem pro- 
nuntiet essentialis baptizandi formae verba: Ego te bap- 
tizo, in nomine patris, et filii, et spiritus sancti, puerum 
vere et rite baptizare? praesertim cum sacerdos id faciens 
non obeat Ecclesiae ministerium, nec quicquam ad puerum 
dieat, sed verba tantum legat historiae. Nec fungatur 
legatione pro Christo, tanquam Deo per ipsum baptizante, 
sed rem gestam recitat tantum. (fol. 118 v.) Ita plane 
et hie necesse est arbitrari, si quis recitet, aut relegat tan- 
tum historiam institutionis huius sacramenti, quomodo illa 
in Paulo conscripta est, non invocet autem tanquam 
Eeclesiae minister, nomen Dei super dona proposita panis 
et vini, nee item consecrationis verba dirigat ad hostiam 
presentem, hunc talem nequaquam consecrare, nec verum 
saeramentum secundum Ecclesiae catholicae sensum et 
traditionem efficere. Aliter profecto censuerunt et fece- 
runt saneti patres Orientalis et Occidentalis Ecclesiae. 
Imo et Apostoli: invocarunt enim super hostiam, velut 
Eeclesiae ministri nomen Dei, eamque solenni prece 
consecrarunt. 

(Fol. 119 v.) 

Unum tantum antiquissimi Irenaei verbum libuit dietis 
adiicere. Is enim libro quarto, capite tricesimoguarto, 
dieit panem, qui percipiat invocationem Dei, fieri Eucha- 
ristiam, ete. lam vero qui canonem non habent, nec 
Deum invocant, nec verba ad dona proposita dirigunt, 
ac pro inde non consecrant, sed legunt tantum historica 
Apostoli Pauli verba, quibus narrat institutionem Christi, 


422 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


non autem quomodo Paulus ipse verba super panem et 
vinum solitus sit pronunciare, quando corpus consecravit 
et sanguinem Domini, quomodo dici gueat istos conse- 
crare ? 


The Book of Common Prayer of the Reformed Episcopal 
Church. Adopted, and set forth for use, by the second 
General Council of the said Church held in the city of 
New York, in the month of May, 1874 


Philadelphia: James A. Moore, 1220 & 1222 Sansom St. 
[1874]. 


All glory be to thee, Almighty God, our heavenly Father, 
for that thou, of thy tender mercy, didst give thine only 
Son Jesus Christ to suffer death upon the cross for our re- 
demption; who made there (by his one oblation of him- 
self once offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, 
oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world; 
and didst [!] institute, and in his holy Gospel command 
us to continue, a perpetual memory of that his precious 
death and sacrifice, until his coming again; for in the night 
in which he was betrayed he took Bread; and, when he 
had given thanks, he brake it, and gave to his disciples, 
saying, Take, eat, this is my body, which is given for you, 
do this in remembrance of me. Likewise, after supper, 
he took the Cup; and, when he had given thanks, he gave 
it to them, saying, Drink ye all [of] this; for this is my 
Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you, and 
for many, for the remission of sins; do this, as oft as ye 
shall drink it, in remembrance of me. (Pp. 93-94.) 


N.B. There is no rubrie preceding, no title given to this ascrip- 
tion of praise, and no “ Amen" at the close. There are also no 
“ manual acts" ordered in the course thereof. 


APPENDIX 423 


The Rev. Edward Stephenss LITURGY ACCORDING TO 
THE USAGE OF THE MOST ANCIENT CHRIS- 
TIANS, c. 1700 


Blessed be thou, Almighty, most glorious, and most 
gracious God, our Heavenly Father, who of thy tender 
mercy didst give thy only Son, Jesus Christ, to suffer 
death upon the cross for our redemption: who made there, 
by his own oblation of himself once offered, a full, perfect, 
and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for the 
sins of the whole world; and did institute, and in his holy 
Gospel command us to continue and celebrate, a perpetual 
memorial of that his precious death and sacrifice, until 
his coming again: and for that purpose, in the same night 
wherein he was betrayed, took bread into his holy and 
imnraculate hands, and looking up to heaven, to thee, his 
God and Father, gave thanks, blessed and sanctified it; 
and brake it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, This is 
the mystery of the New Testament; take, eat, this is my 
body which is given for you: do this in remembrance of 
me. Likewise, after supper he took the chalice of wine, 
mixed with water, and looking up to heaven, to thee his 
God and Father, gave thanks, blessed and sanctified it; 
and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of this; for this 
is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you, 
and for many, for the remission of sins: do this, as often 
as ye shall drink it, in commemoration of me. 

Wherefore, O Lord, Holy Father, we thy humble ser- 
vants, according to his holy institution, with these thy 
holy gifts, commemorating that his bitter but most precious 
death and passion, and solemnly representing the same 
before thy Divine Majesty, as the great, most holy, and 
only propitiation for all our sins, and the sins of the whole 
world; and being mindful also of his powerful resurrection, 
glorious ascension into heaven, and blessed session at 
thy right hand to intercede for us till he shall come again 


424 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


with great power and glory to judge both the living and 
the dead, and to distribute to every one according to their 
works done in the flesh; do offer unto thee, by him, this 
pure and immaculate offering, with our most humble adora- 
tion, highest praises, and most hearty thanks, for thy ines- 
timable clemency, goodness, and benignity to us, therein 
and thereby demonstrated to men and angels: and most 
humbly and earnestly supplicate and beseech thee, that 
this our unbloody, reasonable, and spiritual sacrifice may 
be acceptable and well-pleasing unto thee, most mighty 
God, by our anointed Jesus, who gave himself for us, an 
offering and a sacrifice to thee, for a sweet-smelling savour: 
that thou will be pleased graciously to behold the same, 
and look upon this token and memorial of the Covenant, 
from thy glorious throne in heaven, and be propitious to 
us, and to thy whole Catholic Church, in the free and full 
pardon of all our sins, in a liberal and bountiful collation 
of thy rich treasure of the inestimable graces of thy Holy 
Spirit upon us, and in a gracious audience of the prayers, 
and acceptance of the thanksgivings, which we here offer 
unto thee. And send down thy Holy Spirit upon these 
proposited elements, to sanctify and bless them; that to 
us who partake thereof, this bread may be made the pre- 
cious body of thy Christ, and this wine the precious blood 
of thy Christ, to the remission of all our sins, and to the 
mighty confirmation of us in all grace and virtue, and to 


eternal life. 
Harr's Fragmenta Liturgica, Vol. II., pp. 79-82. 


The Nonjurors’ Liturgy of 1718 


Holiness is thy Nature and thy Gift, O Eternal King; 
Holy is thine only begotten Son our Lord Jesus Christ, 
by whom Thou hast made the Worlds; Holy is thine 
Ever-blessed Spirit, who searcheth all things, even the 
depths of thine infinite Perfection. Holy art Τποι, 
Almighty and Mereiful God; Thou createdst Man in thine 


APPENDIX 425 
own Image, broughtest him into Paradise, and didst 
place him in a state of Dignity and Pleasure: And when 
he had lost his Happiness by transgressing thy Command, 
Thou of thy Goodness didst not abandon and despise 
him. Thy Providence was still continued, thy Law was 
given to revive the Sense of his Duty, thy Prophets were 
commissioned to reclaim and instruct him. And when 
the Fulness of time was come, Thou didst send thine only 
begotten Son to satisfy thy Justice, to strengthen our 
Nature, and renew thine Image within us: For these 
glorious Ends thine Eternal Word came down from 
Heaven, was incarnate by the Holy Ghost, born of the 
Blessed Virgin, conversed with Mankind, and directed his 
Life and Miracles to our Salvation: And when his Hour was 
come to offer the Propitiatory Sacrifice upon the Cross; 
. when he, who had no Sin himself, mercifully undertook 
to suffer Death for our Sins, in the same Night that he 
was betrayed he (a) took Bread; (a) Here the Priest 
and when he had given thanks, 18 to take the Paten 
(b) he brake it, and gave it to his nto his Hands: 

Disciples, saying, Take, eat, (c) (b) And here to 
THIS IS MY BOsRDY, which is break the Bread: 

given for you; Do this in remem- (e) And here to lay 
brance of me. his Hand upon all 

the Bread. 
Here the People shall answer, 
Amen. 
Then shall the Priest say, 


Likewise after Supper (d) he 
took the Cup; and when he had 
given thanks, he gave it to them, 
saying, Drink ye all of this, for (e) 
THIS IS MY BLO»ROD of the New 
Testament, which is shed for you 
and for many for the Remission of 
Sins; Do this, as oft as ye shall 


(d) Here he is to 
take the Cup into his 
Hands: 

(e) And here to lay 
his Hand upon every 
Vessel (be it Chalice 
or Flagon) in which 
there is any Wine and 


426 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


drink it, in remembrance of me. Water to be conse- 
crated. 
Here the People shall answer, 
Amen. 


Then shall the Priest say, 

Wherefore, having in remembrance his Passion, Death, 
and Resurrection from the Dead; his Ascension into 
Heaven, and second coming with Glory and great Power 
to judge the quick and the dead, and to render to every 
Man according to his Works; we offer to Thee, our King 
and our God, according to his holy Institution, this Bread 
and this Cup; giving thanks to Thee through him, that 
Thou hast vouchsafed us the Honour to stand before 
Thee, and to Sacrifice unto Thee. And we beseech Thee 
to look favourably on these thy Gifts, which are here set 
before Thee, O Thou Self-sufficient God: And do Thou 
accept them to the Honour of thy Christ; and send down 
thine Holy Spirit, the Witness of the Passion of our 
Lord Jesus, upon this Sacrifice, that he may make this 
(7) Bread the Body of thy Christ, (f) Here the Priest 
and this (g) Cup the Blood of thy shall lay his hand 
Christ, that they who are par- upon the Bread. 
takers thereof, may be confirmed (5) And here upon 
in Godliness, may obtain Remis- every Vessel (be τί 
sion of their Sins, may be delivered Chalice or Flagon) 
from the Devil and his Snares, may in which there is any 
be replenished with the Holy Ghost, Wine and Water. 
may be made worthy of thy Christ, and may obtain ever- 
lasting Life, Thou, O Lord Almighty, being reconciled unto 
them, through the Merits and Mediation of thy Son our 
Saviour Jesus Christ; who, with Thee and the Holy Ghost, 
liveth and reigneth ever one God, World without end. 


Amen. 
Brerr’s A Collection of the Principal Liturgies, etc., London, 1720, 
pp. 141-143. 


APPENDIX 427 


Bishop Deacon’s HOLY LITURGY, 1754 


Wherefore having in remembrance those things which 
he endured for our sakes, we give thanks to thee, O God 
Almighty, not as we ought, but as we are able, and fulfil 
his institution. For in the same night that he was be- 
trayed, he Here the Priest is to take the Paten into his 
hands took bread into his holy and immaculate hands; 
and looking up to thee his God and Father, and And here 
to break the bread with both his hands, having first set the 
Paten down on the Altar breaking it, he gave it to his dis- 
ciples, saying: This is the mystery of the New Testament; 
take of it; eat; And here to lay his hands upon all the 
bread This is my Body which is broken for many for 
the remission of sins. In like manner also having mixed 
Here he is to take the cup into his hands the cup with 
wine and water, and blessed it, he gave it to them, saying: 
Drink ye all of it; And here, the cup being first set down 
on the altar, he is to lay his hands upon 1t, and upon every 
vessel, in which there is any wine mixed with water to be con- 
secrated This is my Blood, which is shed for many for 
the remission of sins; Do this for a Memorial of me: For 
as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew 
forth my death till I come. 

Therefore in commemoration of his passion, death, and 
resurrection from the dead, his ascension into heaven, and 
second coming with glory and great power to judge the 
quick and the dead, and to render to every man according 
to his works, Here the Priest is to lift up his hands and eyes 
to heaven, we Offer to thee our King and our God, ac- 
cording to his institution, And here to point with his right 
hand to all the bread this Bread and And here to point with 
his left hand to the cup and every vessel on the Altar, in which 
there is any wine and water this Cup; giving thanks to thee 
through him, that thou hast vouchsafed us the honour 
to stand before thee, and to sacrifice unto thee. And we 


428 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


beseech thee to look favourably on these Gifts, which are 
here set before thee, O thou self-sufficient God: And do 
thou Accept them to the honour of thy Christ; and send 
down thine Holy Spirit, the witness of the sufferings of 
the Lord Jesus, upon this sacrifice, that he may make 
Here the Priest is to lay his hands upon all the bread 
this Bread the Bo»Idy And here to make the sign of the 
cross over all the bread of thy Christ, and And here to 
lay his hands upon the cup and upon every vessel on the 
Altar, in which there is any wine and water this Cup the 
Blorfod And here to make the sign of the cross over the cup 
and over every vessel on the Altar, in which there is any wine 
and water of thy Christ; that they who shall partake 
thereof, may be confirmed in godliness, may receive remis- 
sion of their sins, may be delivered from the devil and his 
snares, may be replenished with the Holy Ghost, may be 
made worthy of thy Christ, and may obtain everlasting 


life, Thou being reconciled unto them, O Lord Almighty. 
Original Edition, London, 1734, pp. 91-93. 


Bishop Rattray s OFFICE FOR THE SACRIFICE OF 
THE HOLY EUCHARIST, 1744 


Holy art thou, O eternal King, and the Giver of all 
Holiness: Holy is thine only-begotten Son, our Lord 
Jesus Christ, by whom thou madest the Worlds: Holy 
also is thy holy Spirit, who searcheth all Things, even the 
Depths of Thee, O God. Holy art Thou, who rulest over 
all, almighty and good God, terrible, vet full οἵ Compas- 
sion: But especially indulgent to the Workmanship of 
thy own Hands; for thou didst make Man, formed out 
of the Earth, after thy own Image, and graciously gavest 
him the Enjoyment of Paradise: and when he had lost 
his Happiness by transgressing thy Commandment, thou 
didst not despise nor abandon him; but didst discipline 
him as a mereiful Father, and train him up by the Peda- 
gogy of the Law and the prophets: And last of all thou 


APPENDIX 429 
didst send thine own only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus 
Christ, into the World, that by his Coming he might renew 
thy Image in us: who descended from Heaven, and was 
incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, conversed 
with Mankind, and directed his whole dispensation to 
our Salvation. And when the Hour was come, that he who 
had no Sin, was to suffer a voluntary and life-giving Death 
upon the Cross for us Sinners, in the same Night that he 
was betrayed, or rather offered up himself for the Life and 


Salvation of the World, taking (a) 
Bread into his holy and immacu- 
late Hands, looking up to Heaven 
and presenting it to Thee his God 
and Father, he gave Thanks, sanc- 
tified, and (b) brake it, and gave it 
to his Disciples, saying, Take, eat, 
(c) THIS IS MY ΒΟΥ which 
is broken and given for you: For 
the Remission of Sins. 

In like manner after Supper he 
took the (d) Cup, and having mixed 
it of Wine and Water he gave 
Thanks, sanctified, and blessed it, 
and gave it to his Disciples, saying, 


(a) Here the Priest 
is to take the Paten 
into his Hands. 

(b) Amd here to 
break the Bread. 

(c) And here to 
lay his Hands upon 
all the Bread. 

(d) Here he is to 
take the Chalice into 
his Hands. 

(ο) And here to 
lay his Hands upon 
every Vessel in which 
there is any Wine to 


Drink ye all of this, THIS (e) IS be consecrated. 

MY BLO»ROD of the New Testament, which is shed and 
given for you and for many, for the Remission of Sins. 
Do this in Remembrance of me. : 

Wherefore in Commemoration of his life-giving Passion, 
salutary Cross, Death, Burial, and Resurrection from the 
Dead on the third Day, his Ascension into Heaven, and 
Sitting at the right Hand of Thee his God and Father, 
and looking for his second and terrible Advent, when he 
shall come again with Glory to judge the Quick and the 
Dead, and shall render to every one according to his Works, 
we Sinners offer to Thee, O Lord, this tremendous and 


430 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


unbloody Sacrifice: Beseeching Thee, that thou wouldst 
not deal with us after our Sins, nor reward us after 
our Iniquities; but according to thy Clemency and 
ineffable Love to Mankind overlooking and blotting 
out the Hand-writing that is against us thy Ser- 
vants, wouldst grant us thy heavenly and eternal good 
Things, for thy People and thine Inheritance make their 
Supplieations unto Thee: Have Mercy upon us, O Lord 
God, Almighty Father, have Mercy upon us according to: 
thy great Mercy, and send down thy holy Spirit upon 
us, and upon these Gifts which are here set before 
Thee, that by his Descent upon them, he may make this 
(a) Bread the holy BO»RDY of thy (a) Here the Priest 
Christ, and this (b) Cup the pre- shall lay his Hands 
cious BLO»ROD of thy Christ; that upon all the Bread. 
they may be to all who partake of (b) And here upon 
them, for the Sanctification of Soul the Chalice, and every 
and Body, for bringing forth the Vessel in which there 
Fruit of good Works, for Remission 18 any wine. 

of Sins, and for Life everlasting. 

Original Edition, London, 1744, pp. 116-117. 


Extract from a Letter in the Possession of the Rev. 
\ W. F. Brand, D.D. 


8 CHELSEA SQUARE, N.Y. 
Jany. 17, 1899. 
My DEAR DR. BRAND: 

My attention having been called to your letter in the 
Churchman οἱ Jany. 7, I read it with great interest and 
satisfaction: and, although I am at present rather par- 
ticularly engaged, I feel that I should be deficient in my 
duty, if I did not, “all business and excuses being laid 
aside," at once render to you my hearty thanks for the 
trouble which you have taken in this matter, and for the 
clear, courageous, and convincing manner in which you 
have expressed yourself. 


APPENDIX 431 


I regret, however, that you conceded so much as-to 
accept as true the attributing of extreme views to Bishop 
Seabury. With all the decision and firmness of his char- 
acter, which made him uncompromising in principle, and 
very direet and positive in statement, there is nothing, 
I think, more remarkable in him than his moderation: 
nor, perhaps, does anything furnish better evidence of this, 
in general, than the manifest tendency of certain brethren 
to consider his. churchmanship as deficient, as indeed it 
is — in the same sense in which the Primitive Church was 
deficient in the churchmanship developed in later times. 

That his views even upon the question of the validity of 
Consecration without Invocation were extreme, is, I think, 
not apparent. To say that he hardly considered the 
English form as “strietly amounting to a consecration,” 
and to yield to another the use of it in the Celebration, 
amounts to no more, especially under the cireumstances 
of the matter being then under particular consideration; 
than a distinct disapproval of that form as compared with 
another. Had he declined to receive the elements thus 
consecrated, there might have been more room for the 
charge of extreme views. And even stronger expressions 
than this, such as I will refer to later, are to be understood 
argumentatively, to point the urgency of his appeal for 
a better and more perfect way, rather than taken abso- 
lutely condemnatory of a way by which he himself had 
been from his youth a partaker of the means of grace. 

The implication that the Invocation is not to [be] re- 
garded as essential to consecration in the American Church 
because that would be a departure in doctrine from the 
English Church, reminds me of what Bp. Seabury said 
in regard to the claim of the Methodists to a valid Episco- 
pate — that it was “something very like impudence." 
If the Church, of England teaches as matter of doctrine 
that the bare recitation of the words of Institution suffices 
for Consecration, it is obvious from the Form provided, and 


432 ΤΗΕ CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


from the requirement of its repetition in case of conse- 
cration of additional elements, that the American Church 
has, in so-far, departed. But the just inference from the 
declaration in the Preface coupled with the Form pro- 
vided, is that, in the judgment of the American Church, the 
Church of England held at least implieitly the doctrine 
which the American form explicitly stated and more care- 
fully, guarded. And such, I think, has been the ground 
notably taken by defenders of the Church of England from 
the charge of deficiency in this particular: that the Church 
meant not to ignore the agency of the Holy Spirit, but im- 
plied the prayer for it in the words associated with the 
words of Institution. Nor would this ground be essentially 
weakened by the omission of such associated words in 
a second consecration of elements, since these words once 
used already might fairly be taken as applicable to the 
whole Celebration, of which the second consecration was 
merely an incident. That the American Church has pro- 
vided for the use of the form in full in similar contingency, 
only shows the greater care with which it has guarded the 
principle involved: and, as evidence of doctrine, the posi- 
tive requirement in the American Church is much more 
weighty than the omission in the English Church. 

'The point made by your English correspondent as to the 
position occupied by those who use the English form, and 
that of those who would use the American form if it ended 
with the words of Institution, is extremely well taken, and 
should serve as a caution. 

It is obvious, and I suppose the charge would not be 
repudiated, that the motive of the criticism to which you 
justly take exception, is not only unwillingness to depart 
from the position of the Church of England, but also, and 
especially, anxiety to coincide with that of Rome. . . . 

It is worthy of notice that this very tendency of the 
English form to lead men in the same direction as does the 
Roman form, was present to the mind of Bp. Seabury 


APPENDIX 433 


in his advocacy of the fuller form which he urged. Not 
only was this point present to his mind, but it was most 
explicitly and emphatically pressed by him upon Bp. 
White, and through him upon the members of the Con- 
vention. The letter which Bp. Seabury wrote to Bp. 
White in June 1789 was written, as the author informs 
him, in expectation that it would be laid before the Con- 
vention, whose next session was in the ensuing August. 
It was this session which was adjourned for that in Octo- 
ber, at which Bp. Seabury and representatives from East- 
ern States were present by invitation; and at which, 
the Constitution having been acceded to, the revision of 
the Book of Common Prayer was taken up and con- 
cluded. 

The following extract from this letter bears closely upon 
this point. I take it from the copy in Beardsley's life 
of Bp. Seabury, and transcribe it in full lest the volume 
should at present happen not to be at hand. 

“That . . . efficacy.” [See above, pp. 228-229.] 

Is it even possible that the two Houses of General Con- 
vention, in providing for the restoration here referred to, 
acted not only inadvertently, but in mere stupidity, with 
no intent to recognize, and in actual ignorance of, any 
difference between the form abandoned and that which 
was substituted forit[?] Credat M . . . ! Itis,to say the 
least, wholly improbable. Bp. White certainly had fair 
notice of the point of difference, even supposing, which 
I have too much respect for his theological intelligence to 
imagine, that he would not otherwise have seen it. Dr. 
Wm. Smith, the President of the lower House, whose 
reading of the proposed form is said to have produced so 
favourable an impression upon its members, was also in 
a position to understand the significance of the change; 
and if the House as a body was not educated up to the 
standard of modern knowledge of ancient and medieval 
ritual, it was not so obtuse as to fail to recognize a differ- 


434 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


ence palpable to anyone who was without a motive to 
induce him to ignore it. 
With much respect, 
As ever truly yours, 
(signed) Wm. J. SEABURY. 
The Revd. 
W.F. BRAND, D.D. 


Notices and Journals, and Remains of Journals, of the 
two preliminary Conventions of the Clergy, and of the first 
five annual Conventions and two adjourned Conventions 
of the Clergy and Laity of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church in the Diocese of Maryland. In the years 1783, 
1784, 1785, 1786, 1787, 1788:.... 


From the papers of the Rev. Dr. West, Secretary of the 
Convention. (Never before published.) 

[N.B. These form a special appendix (with separate pagination) 
to the “Journal of the Seventy-Second Annual Convention of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church in Maryland; Held in S. Peter’s 
Church, Baltimore, Wednesday, May 30; Thursday, May 31; 
and Friday, June 1, 1855. Baltimore: Printed by Joseph Robin- 
son, No. 125 Baltimore St., 1855."] 


An adjourned Convention of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church in Maryland. 

Held in Annapolis, April, 1786. 

Of this Convention there are no manuscript papers 
remaining, but reference is made to it in a succeeding 
Journal. 

On the 17th and 18th pages of the Journal of the Con- 
vention in 1789, we find that a report was then made and 
agreed to, “that the article agreed to in a Convention of 
April, 1786, respecting the ratification of the Book of 
Common Prayer, &c., recommended by the General Con- 
vention held in 1785 at Philadelphia, and the amend- 
ments proposed to be made to the same by the Conven- 
tion of this State, held in April, 1786, be adopted." 


APPENDIX 435 


The article agreed to in Convention, April, 1786, is as 
follows: — 

“The Convention then took into serious consideration 
the Book of Common Prayer, and the administration of 
the Sacraments, &c., as recommended by the General 
Convention at Philadelphia, for the future use of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church in these United States; and 
although they could have wished that the book had been 
published time enough for every member to have had a 
deliberate consideration and perusal of it, before the meet- 
ing of this Convention, yet nevertheless, having examined “ 
and considered it, with all the attention and care that the 
time of their sitting would admit, they do approve and 
ratify the same, as far as their powers extend, and recom- 
mend it to the use of the several churches in this State as 
soon as the congregations can be supplied with a sufficient 
number of books — proposing to the General Convention 
that shall meet in Philadelphia in June next, that in the 
future editions of the Common Prayer Book, the follow- 
ing additions, alterations, or amendments be ordered, 
viz.: 

. . . That in the consecration prayer in the Holy Sacra- 
ment, after the words ‘until His coming again,’ and before 
the words ‘our Saviour Jesus Christ’s holy institution,’ 
4e inserted the following paragraph, instead of that which 
now stands, viz: ‘Hear us O mereiful Father, we most 
humbly beseech Thee, and of Thy Almighty goodness 
vouchsafe so to bless and sanctify these Thy creatures of 
bread and wine, that we receiving them according to Thy 
OH ceto 

There were also delegates for the General Convention 
to be holden in June, 1786, appointed. "Two of them, as is 
shown by the Journal of that Convention, were the Rev. 
Dr. William Smith, and the Rev. William Smith of Step- 
ney, Somerset. Pp. 12,19. 


436 THE CONSECRATION OF THE EUCHARIST 


Journal of the Meetings, which led to the Institution 
of a Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the 
State of Pennsylvania: together with the Journals of the 
First Six Conventions of the said Church. 

Philadelphia. 
Printed by Hall & Sellers — No. 51 — Market-street. 
M.DCC.XC. 


Saturday 27 May, 1786. 

The Committee appointed to view and consider the 
Book of Common Prayer, made their report; and the 
same, being duly considered, was adopted, in the words 
following, viz. 

“The convention having examined the Book of Com- 
mon Prayer, as revised and proposed by the general con- 
vention of September and October last, instruct their 
deputies to the ensuing general convention to propose 
the following amendments. 

*. , , Second. That, in the consecration-prayer, in the 
office of the holy saerament, after the words, “until his 
coming again, and before the words, ‘according to thy 
Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's holy institution,’ be inserted 
the following paragraph, instead of that now used: 
‘Hear us, O mereiful Father, we most humbly beseech 
thee; and of thy almighty goodness, vouchsafe so to bless 
and sanetify these thy creatures of bread and wine, that 
we, receiving them.’”’ Pp. 15, 16. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY! 


Address to the Members of the Episcopal Church in Scotland, by 
a Layman, London, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, 1840. 

Agobard of Lyons, De Privilegio et Jure Sacerdotii, P.L? civ. 
Liber contra Libros Quatuor Amalarii Abbatis, P.L. civ. 
Aleuin, Disputatio Puerorum, P.L. ci. Liber Sacramentorum, 

P.I. di. 

Alger of Liege, De Sacramentis Corporis et Sanguinis Dominici, 
Pb. cho. 

*Alphabetum Sacerdotum, Paris, 1499, in Tracts on the Mass. 

Amalarius, De Ecclesiasticis Officiis, P.L. ev. Eclogae de Officio 
Missae, P.L. cv. 

Ambrose (S.), of Milan, De Benedictionibus Patriarcharum, 
ευ μα | De Ride, PL τα De „Mystérns, P.L. Xvi. 
De Spiritu Sancto, P.L. xvi. 

Anastasius Sinaita, Oratio de Sacra Synaxi, P.G? Ixxxix. 

Andrewes, Bp. Launcelot, Preces Privatae, ed. Brightman, Lon- 
don, 1903. Visitation Articles, Minor Works, A.C.L.,' Ox- 
ford, 1854. Sermons, Vol. III., A.C.L., Oxford, 1841. 

Answer of the Great Church of Constantinople to the Papal Ency- 
clical on Union [1896]. 

Antididagma, seu Christianae et Catholicae religionis per Rever. 
et Illust. Dominos Canonicos Metropolitanae Ecclesiae 
Coloniensis propugnatio, adversus librum . . . nuper bonae 
titulo Rejormationis exhibitum, ac postea . . . Consultoriae 
deliberationis nomine impressum . . . Parisiis . . . 1545. 

Atchley, E. G. Cuthbert F., *English Ceremonial, in Vol. IIII., 
pp. 3-35, of The Library of Liturgiology and Ecelesiology 
for English Readers, London, 1904. Ordo Romanus Pri- 
mus, with Introduction and Notes, Vol. VI., same series, 
London, 1905. 

Athanasius (S.), of Alexandria, Sermo in Bapt., P.G. xxvi. 

Atrebatensis, Acta Synodi, 1025 a.p., P.L. exlii. 

Augustine (S.), of Hippo, De Trinitate, P.L. xlii. Epistola exlix. 
ad Paulinum, P.L. xxxii. Hom. 227, in die Paschae iv., 
P.L. xxxvii. Sermones inediti, P.L. xlvi. 


"This list (with a few exceptions marked +) contains only those works 
quoted from, or referred to, in the foregoing pages. 

? P.L. — Migne's Patrologia Latina. 

$ P.G. = Migne's Patrologia Graeca. 

+ A.C.L. = Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology. 


437 


438 BIBLIOGRAPHY 


*Badger, G. P., The Nestorians and their Rituals, two vols., 
London, 1852. 

Basil (S.), of Caesarea, De Spiritu Sancto, P.G. xxxii. 

Beardsley, E. Edwards, Lije and Correspondence of the Rt. Rev. 
Samuel Seabury, D.D., Boston, 1881. - 

Becon, Thomas, Works, Parker Society, Cambridge, 1843-1844. 

Bede, The Venerable, Homilies, Book I., P.L. κοῖν. 

Berengar of Tours, De Sacra Coena, ed. A. F. and F. Th. Vischer, 
Berlin, 1834. 

Bernardakis, D. N., IEPA ΚΑΤΗΧΗΣΙΣ (third edition), Con- 
stantinople, 1876. 

Bernold of Constance, Micrologus, P.L. cli. 

Bethune-Baker, J. F., An Introduction to the Early History of 
Christian Doctrine, ete., London, 1903. 

*Biges, C. R. Davey, edited by, The Worship of the Orthodox 
Church, Occasional Paper No. V., New Series, of the Eastern 
Church Association, Oxford, 1903. 

Bingham, Joseph, Origines Ecclesiasticae, edition revised by 
Richard Bingham (eight volumes), London, 1834. 

* Bishop, Edmund, The Genius oj the Roman Rite, in Vol. IIII., of 
The Library of Liturgiology and Ecelesiology for English 
Readers, pp. 281-307, London, 1904. 

*Blackmore, R. W., The Doctrine of the Russian Church, Aber- 
deen, 1845. 

Book oj Common Prayer, The, for Scotland, original edition, 
Edinburgh, 1637. 

Book oj Common Prayer, The, Sealed Book, first edition, Lon- 
don, 1662. 

Book of Common Prayer, The, American (after the Standard), 
New York, 1892. 

Book oj Common Worship, The, set forth for voluntary use by the 
General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S. A., 
Philadelphia, 1905. 

*Borovnitsky, Ivan, The Origin and Composition oj the Roman 
Catholic Liturgy, ete. (translated from the Russian by Basil 
Popoff), London, 1863. 

Box, G. H., The Jewish Antecedents oj the Eucharist, in The 
Journal of Theological Studies) Vol. III., pp. 357-369 
(April, 1902). 

Bramhall, Abp. John, The Consecration and Succession of Protes- 
tant Bishops Justified, Works, Vol. 111., A.C.L., Oxford, 1844. 

Brett, Bp. Thomas, A Collection of the Principal Liturgies . 
with a Dissertation upon Them, London, 1720. (Reprinted, 
1838.) 

Brightman, F. E., Liturgies Eastern and Western, Vol. I., Eastern 


! Usually indicated by J. Th. S. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 439 


Liturgies, Oxford, 1896. *The Eucharistie Sacrifice [not 
published]. 

Bruno of Segni, Commentaria in Matthaeum, P.L. clxv. Senten- 
tiarum, Liber IV., 9, P.L. clxv. 

Burbidge, Edward, Origin of the Roman Canon, in The Guardian, 
March 24, 1897, p. 471. 

Burckard, John, Ordo Missae, Rome, 1502, in Tracts on the Mass. 

Cabasilas, Nicholas, Abp. of Thessalonica, Exposition of the 
Divine Liturgy, P.G. cl. 

*Cabrol, F., Les Origines Liturgiques, Paris, 1906. 

C:esarius of Arles, De Paschate, P.L. Ixvii. 

Campbell, Bp. Archibald, An Essay upon the Holy Eucharist 
appended to The Doctrine of a Middle State . . ., London, 
1721. 

Caroline Books, The, P.L. xevii. 

Carthusians, Ancient Statutes of, in Marténe, De Antiquis 
Ecclesiae Ritibus, Libri Tres, etc., Editio novissima (four 
volumes), Antwerp, 1763-1764. 

*Cheffontaine, Christophe de, Vari? Tractatus et Disputationes 
de eo quod. sit utile atque necessarium, nonnullas secum pug- 
nantes scholasticorum scriptorum opiniones, . . . ad decre- 
torum concilii Tridentini normam conciliare et corrigere. 
Authore R. P. C. de capite fontium Archiep. Caesarien. 
nuper totius ordinis Minorum generali ministro. Ad Sixtum 
quintum Pontificem maximum. Parisiis, 1586. 

Chosroae Magni Episcopi Monophysitici | Explicatio Precum 
Missae, e lingua Armenica in Latinam versa per Dr. P. 
Vetter, Friburgi Brisgoviae, 1880. 

Chrysostom (S.), John, De Coemeterio et Cruce, P.G. xlix. De 
Sacerdotio, P.G. xlviii. Hom. i. and $i. De Proditione 
Judae, P.G. xlix. Hom. xlv. in Joannem, P.G. lix. Hom. 
in Pentecost., P.G. 1. Hom. ťi. in 2 Tim., P.G. lxi. 

Church Quarterly Review, The, Vol. XXIX., No. 58 (January, 
1890), Mr. Baring-Gould and the Holy Eucharist in the First 
Three Centuries, pp. 355-385. Vol. XXXI., No. 62 (Janu- 
ary, 1891), Capitulum Coloniense: An Episode in the 
Rejormation, pp. 419-437. *Vol. XXXVIII., No. 76 (July, 
1894), The Gelasian Sacramentary, pp. 347-358. *Vol. 
XLII., No. 83 (April, 1896), Anglican Orders, Part II., 
pp. 24-51. Vol. LIV., No. 108 (July, 1902), The Early 
Years of the Reign of Elizabeth, pp. 339-356. Vol. LXIII., 
No. 126 (January, 1907), The Mozarabie Rite. II. The 
Mozarabic Mass, pp. 298-322. 

Church Times, The, Review of Dr. Gee’s “The Elizabethan 
Prayer Book and Ornaments," May 9, 1902, p. 579. 

Ciconiolanus, Ludovicus, Directorium Divinorum | Officiorum, 
Rome, 1539, in Tracts on the Mass. 


440 BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, I., xix., P.G. vin. 

Clermont, Synodical Statutes of, 1268 a.p., Mansi,' XXIII. 

Collier, Bp. Jeremy, A Vindication oj the Reasons and Defence, 
ete., Part IL, London, 1719. 

Cologne, Synod of, 1280 a.p., Mansi, XXIV. 

*Comper, J., The Catholic Theory of the Consecration of the Holy 
Eucharist, Edinburgh, n. d. 

Constantinople, Council of, 754 A.p., Mansi, XIII. 

Cooper, J., The Book oj Common Prayer . . . commonly known 
as Laud's Liturgy (1637), with Historical Introduction and 
Illustrative Notes, Edinburgh and London, 1904. 

Cooper, J., and A. J. Maclean, T'he Testament of Our Lord, trans- 
lated into English from the Syriae, with Introduction and 
Notes, Edinburgh, 1902. 

Cosin, Bp. John, Historia Transubstantiationis Papalis, Works, 
A.C.L., Vol. IV., Oxford, 1851. Notes on the Book oj Com- 
mon Prayer, second series, A.C.L., Vol. V., Oxford, 1855. 

Covel, John, Some Account of the Present Greek Church, ete., 
Cambridge, 1722. 

Crakanthorp, Richard, Defensio Ecclesiae Anglicanae, A.C.L., 
Oxford, 1847. 

*Currie, Hugh P., Notes on the Scottish Liturgy, etc., Edinburgh 
and Oxford, 1902. 

Cyprian, De Oratione Dominica, P.L. iv. De Unitate Ecclesiae 
Catholicae, P.L. iv. Epistle to Epictetus, P.L. iv. 

Cyril (S.) of Alexandria, Epistle (Oecumen.) w. to Nestorius, 
P.G. Ixxvu. In Joannem, P.G. Ixxin. In Ľucom, P.G. 
Ixxii. In Matthaeum, P.G. Ixxi. 

Cyril (S.) of Jerusalem, Catecheses, P.G. xxxiii. 

*Dabovich, S., The Holy Orthodox Church, ete., Wilkes Barre, 
1898. 

Damascene, John, De Fide Orthodoxa, P.G. xciv. Hom. de 
Sabbato Sancto, P.G. xevi. 

Deacon, Bp. Thomas, A Compleat Collection of Devotions, etc., 
London, 1734. A Full, True, and Comprehensive View οἱ 
Christianity, etc., . . . The Whole succinctly and fully laid 
down in Two Catechisms, London, 1747. 

Delisle, L., Mémoire sur d'Anciens Sacramentaires, in t. XXXII. 
part. L, Mémoires de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belle- 
Lettres, Paris, 1886. 

De Vert, Claude, Explication . . . des Cérémonies de l’Eglise 
(four volumes), Paris, 1720, 1710, 1713, 1713. 

De Vignay, Jean, Exposition de la Messe, from La Légende Dorée, 
ed. W. H. Frere, Alcuin Club Collections, II., London, 1899. 


! Amplissima Collectio Conciliorum, H. Welter's facsimile edition, 
41 vols., Paris and Leipzig, 1901--1905. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 441 


Dictionnaire d’Archéologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie, Vol. L., 
Paris, 1907, articles, AMEN, cols. 1554-1573; ANAMNESE, 
cols. 1880-1896; ANAPHORE, cols. 1898-1918, all by Dom 
F. Cabrol. 

Dionysius of Alexandria (in Eusebius), P.G. xx., 656. 

Dionysius bar Salibi, Expositio Liturgiae (abstract of), in Asse- 
mani, Bibliotheca Orientalis, à., Rome, 1721. *Expositio 
Liturgiae, ed. H. Labourt, in Scriptores Syri, series secunda, 
tomus xciii., Paris, 1903. 

Dowden, Bp. John, The Annotated Scottish Communion Office, 
ete., Edinburgh, 1884. The Workmanship of the Prayer 
Book in its Literary and Liturgical Aspects, London, 1899. 
Catalogue of the Correspondence between the Nonjuring 
Bishops and the Eastern Churches (1716-1725), in J. Th. S., 
Vol. I., pp. 562-568 (July, 1900). 

Duchesne, L., Origines du Culte Chretien (second edition), Paris, 
1898. Christian Worship: Its Origin and Evolution (Eng- 
lish translation from third French edition), London, 1903. 

Durandus of Mende, Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, Naples, 
1859. 

Durandus of Troarn, Liber de Corpore et Sanguine Christi, P.L. 
exlix. 

Ebner, A., Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte . . . des 
Missale Romanum im Mittelalter. Iter Italicum. Freiburg 
im Breisgau, 1896. 

Ephraem Syrus, De Sacerdotio; De Sanctis et Vivif. Christ. 
Sacramentis; Explanatio in Ezek., Opera Omnia, ed. Petrus 
Benedietus, six volumes, Rome, 1732-1746. 

*Etheridge, J. W., The Syrian Churches, ete., London, 1846. 

Eusebius of Alexandria, in John Damascene, Sacr. Paral. 11., 
xxix. Po. zeyi. 

Eusebius Bruno, Epistola ad Berengarium | Magistrum, P.L. 
exlvii. 

Eusebius of Cxsarea, De Laudibus Constantini, P.L. xx. 

Eustratius Argentes, T'reatise against Azymes, divided into Three 
Parts, of which . . . the Second is concerning the Consecra- 
tion of the Mystery, ete., Nauplia, 1845. (See above, p. 108, 
nes 1 

Euthymius Zigadenus, Panoplia Dogmatica, P.G. exxx. 

Eutychius of Constantinople, De Pasch. et de SS. Euch., P.G. 
Ixxxvi. 

Exeter, Synod of, 1287 a.p., Mansi, XXIV. 

Ἐὐχολόγιον τὸ μέγα, Venice, 1891. 

*Fairbairn, R. B., The Oblation and the Invocation, etc., New 
York, 1894. 

Férotin, M., Le Liber Ordinum . . . publié pour la premiére fois 
avec une introduction . . . etc., Paris, 1904. 


442 BIBLIOGRAPHY 


*Ffoulkes, E. S., Primitive Consecration of the Eucharistic Obla- 
tion, ete., London, 1885. 

Firmilian of Cesarea, Epistola ad Cyprianum, P.L. m. 

Florence, Council of, 1439 a.p., Proceedings of, etc., Mansi, 
XXXI A and XXXI B. 

Florus, De Expositione Missae, P.L. exix. Opuscula adv. 
Amalarium, P.L. exix. 

Forbes, Bp. Robert, A Catechism dealing chiefly with the Holy 
Eucharist, edited from the original MSS. for the Scottish 
Clergy Society, by John Dowden, D.D., Edinburgh, 1904. 

Forbes, Bp. William, Considerationes Modestae, two vols., 
A.C.L., Oxford, 1850, 1856. 

Frankland, W. B., The Early Eucharist (A.p. 30-180), London, 
1902. 

Frere, W. H., *Edwardine Vernacular Services before the First 
Prayer Book, in J. Th. S., Vol. I., pp. 229-246 (January, 
1900). A New History of the Book of Common Prayer, 
with a Rationale oj Its Offices, on the Basis oj the former 
Work of Francis Procter, M.A., revised and rewritten, Lon- 
don, 1901. The Use of Sarum, two vols., Cambridge, 1898, 
1901. 

[Froude, R. H.,] The Antiquity of the Existing Liturgies, Tract 
No. 63, Tracts for the Times, by Members of the University 
of Oxford, Vol. IL, for 1834-1835, London, Rivington; 
Oxford, Parker, 1836. 

Fulgentius, of Ruspe, Ad Monimum, P.L. Ixv. Fragmenta adv. 
Fabianum, P.L. lxv. 

*Funk, F. X., Didascalia et Constitutiones A postolorum, two vols., 
Paderborn, 1905. 

Gabriel of Philadelphia, A pologia pro Ecclesia Orientali, in Fides 
Ecclesiae Orientalis, seu Gabrielis Metropolitae Philadel- 
phiensis Opuscula . . . opera et studio Richardi Simonis 
A: Parisussio7L. 

Gasquet, F. A., and E. Bishop, Edward VI. and the Book of 
Common Prayer . . ., second edition, London, 1891. 

Gaudentius of Brescia, Sermo ü., P.L. xx. 

Gee, Henry, The Elizabethan Prayer Book and Ornaments, London, 
1902. 

Gelasius L, Pope, Epistle to Elpidius, Mansi, VIII. 

Gerbert, Martinus, Monumenta. Veteris. Liturgiae. Alemannicae 
(two vols.), Typis San-Blasianis, 1777, 1779. 

Germanus of Constantinople, Rerum Eccl. Contemplatio, P.G. 
xevil. 

*Gibson, Edmund, Codex Juris Ecclesiastici. Anglicani, second 
edition, two vols., Oxford, 1761. 

[Gillespie,] A Dispute against the English-Popish Ceremonies 
obtruded upon the Church oj Scotland, 1660. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 445 


Gore, Bp. Charles, Dissertations on Subjects connected with the 
Incarnation, New York, 1895. The Body of Christ, New 
York, 1901. The Church and the Ministri y, fourth edition, 
London, 1900. 

Grabe, J. E., De Forma Consecrationis Eucharistiae, ete., A 
Defence o] the Greek Church against the Roman, in the Article 
o] the Consecration oj the Eucharistical Elements, London, 
1721. 

Gregory the Great, Pope, Epistle to John of Syracuse, P.L. Ixxvii. 
Dialogues, P.L. Ixxvii. 

Gregory of Nyssa, De Bapt. Christi, P.G. xlvi. Epist. can. ad 
Letoium epis. Melit., P.G. xlv. In laudem fratris basilii, 
P.G. xlvi. Oratio Catechetica, P.G. xlv. 

Guitmund of Aversa, De Corpore et Sanguine Domini, P.L. exlix. 

Hammond, C. E., The Ancient Liturgy of Antioch and other 
Liturgical Fragments, ete., Oxford, 1879.  *Liturgies 
Eastern and Western, Oxford, 1878. 

*Harmony, A, of Anglican Doctrine with the Doctrine of the Cath- 
olic and A postolic Church o] the East, ete., Aberdeen, 1846. 

Hart, Samuel, Bishop Seabury's Communion Office, reprinted in 
faesimile, with an Historical Sketch and Notes, second 
edition, revised, New York, 1883. 

Harvey, W. W.,edited by, Irenaeus adv. Haereses, etc., two vols., 
Cambridge, 1857. 

*Hassia, Henricus de, Secreta Sacerdotum, ete., Nuremberg, 1507. 

Headlam, A. C., The Teaching ο) the Russian Church, ete. (Eastern 
Church Association), London, 1897. 

Henke, C., Die katholische Lehre über die Con secrationsworte, etc., 
Trier, 1850. 

Hickes, Bp. George, Treatises, three vols., A.C.L., Oxford, 1847— 
1848. 

Hildebert of Tours, De M ysterio Missae, P.L. clxxi. 

Honorius of Autun, Gemma Animae, P.L. clxxi. 

. Honorius III., Pope, Ad Praelatos Hiberniae, Mansi, XXII. 

Hooker, Richard, Works, two vols., Oxford, 1850. 

Hoppe, L. A., Die Epiklesis der griechischen und orientalischen 
Liturgieen und der römische Consekrationskanon, Schaff- 
hausen, 1864. 

*Horner, G., The Statutes oj the A postles, etc., London 1904. 

Hort, FJ. A. , Εὐχαριστῶ --- εὐχαριστεῖν, in J. ΤΆ. ο, νο LEES 
ΡΡ. 594-598 (July, 1902). 

*Howard, G. B., The Christians o St. Thomas and Their Liturgies, 
ete., Oxford and London, 1864. 

Hubert, F., Die Strassburger liturgischen Ordnungen im Zeitalter 
der Reformation, ete., Göttingen, 1900. 

Hugo of S.Victor ( ?), Speculum de Mystervis Ecclesiae, P.L. clxxvii. 

Indutus Planeta, Lyons, 1507, in Tracts on the Mass. 


444 BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Introduction, An, containing Observations on the Services for 
Morning and Evening, Sundays and Holydays, prefixed to an 
edition of the (American) Book of Common Prayer published 
by Plowman and Tanner, at Philadelphia, in 1805. 

Irengus (S.), Adv. Haereses, P.G. vii. (?) Fragment xxxvi., 
Harvey, Π., 500. 

Isidore of Pelusium, Epistolae, P.G. Ixxvii. 

Isidore (S.), of Seville, De Ecclesiasticis Officiis, P.L. Ixxxiii. 
(?) Epistle (VII.) to Redemptus, P.L. Ixxxiii. — Originum, 
PE Rosa 

Jacobs, H. E., The Lutheran Movement in England, etc., revised 
edition, Philadelphia, 1894. 

Jerome, Ad Evangelum, P.L. xxu. Commentary on Zephaniah, 
Εν xxv. 

Johnson, John, Works, two vols., A.C.L., Oxford, 1847. 

Justin Martyr, First Apology, P.G. vi. 

*Keeling, William, Liturgiae Britannicae, Second edition, Lon- 
don, 1851. 

Kidd, B. J., The Later Mediaeval Doctrine of the Eucharistic 
Sacrifice, London, 1898. 

Lambert, J. C., T'he Passover and the Lord's Supper, in J. Th. S., 
Vol. IV., pp. 184-193 (January, 1903). 

Lathbury, T., A History oj the Nonjurors, ete., London, 1845. 

Laud, Abp.William, Works, seven vols., A.C.L., Oxford, 1847-1860. 

Le Brun, P., Ezplication . . . de la Messe, etc., four vols., 
Paris, 1726. Défense de l'ancien Sentiment sur la Forme de 
la Consécration de V Eucharistie, ete., Paris, 1727. 

Legg, J. Wickham, Tracts on the Mass (Henry Bradshaw Society, 
Vol. XXVII), London, 1904. *Mediaeval Ceremonial, 
pp. 27-46 in his Ecelesiological Essays (Vol. VII. of The 
Library of Liturgiology and Ecclesiology for English 
Readers), London, 1905. 

Leishman, T., The Westminster Directory, edited with an Intro- . 
duetion and Notes, Edinburgh and London, 1901. 

L'Estrange, Hamon, The Alliance oj Divine Offices, etc., A.C.L., 
Oxford, 1846. 

Mabillon, J., Museum Italicum, ete. (two vols.), Lutetiae Parisi- 
orum, 1724. 

*Macarius, Handbuch zum Studium der christlichen, orthodox- 
dogmatischen Theologie, ins Deutsche übersetzt von Dr. 
Blumenthal, Moskau, 1875. Theologie dogmatique ortho- 
doxe, traduite par un Russe (two vols.), Paris, 1860. 

Maclean, Bp. A. J., Recent Discoveries illustrating Early Christian 
Lije and Worship, London, 1904. 

Magistretti, M., Beroldus sive Ecclesiae Ambrosianae Medio- 
lanensis Kalendarium οἱ Ordines Saec. XII. ex Codice Am- 
brosiano . . . Mediolani, 1894. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 445 


Malzew, A., Die göttlichen Liturgieen unserer heiligen Väter 
Johannes Chrysostomos, Basilios des Grossen und Gregorios 
Dialogos. Deutsch und slawisch . . . Berlin, 1890. Die 
Sacramente der Orthodox-Katholischen Kirche des morgen- 
landes. Deutsch und slawisch . . . Berlin, 1898. #Die 

. Liturgien, ete., Berlin, 1894. — *Liturgikon, Berlin, 1902. 

Manuel (Great Rhetor), Answer of, P.G. exl. 

Mark of Ephesus, That the divine gijts are not consecrated by 
the utterance of the Lord's words merely, etc., P.G. elx. 

*Maude, J. H., The History oj the Book of Common Prayer, New 
York, 1899. 

Mayence, Provincial Council of, 1261 A.p., Mansi, XXIII. 

*MeGarvey, William, Liturgiae Americanae, Philadelphia, 1895. 

*Milne, J. R., Considerations on Eucharistic Worship, or True and 
False Doctrine ο) the Eucharistic Sacrifice, London, 1893. 
The Doctrine and Practice of the Eucharist as deduced jrom 
Scripture and the Ancient Liturgies, London, 1895. 

*Mirkovitch, Gregory, O Bpemenn [IlIpecymjecrpAaenis 
CBATHXB /laposs, Bu.ma, 1886. 

* Missale ad usum insignis et praeclarae Ecclesiae Sarum, labore 
et studio F. H. Dickinson, Burntisland, 1861-1883. 

Missale juxta ritum Ecclesie Romane . . . Parisiis, Ex offi- 
cina libraria Iolande Bonhomme, vidue Thielmanni Kerver 
23 21555. 

Missale Romanum (ex Decreto Sacrosancti Concilii Tridentini 
restitutum). Antverpiae excudebat Christophorus Plan- 
finus . ... 15/8. 

Missale Mixtum . . . Praefatione, Notis et Appendicibus ab 
Alexandro Lesleo, S. J., sacerdote, ornatum . . . P.L., Ixxxv. 

Mone, F. J., Lateinische und griechische Messen aus dem zweiten 
bis sechsten Jahrhundert. Frankfurt am Main, 1850. 

Morton, Bp. Thomas, Of the Institution ο) the Sacrament of the 
Blessed Bodie and Blood of Christ (by some called) the Masse 
of Christ, London, 1631. A 

Moschus, John, Pratum Spirituale, P.G. Ixxxvii. 

Mouravieff, A. N., A History oj the Church oj Russia (translated 
from the Russian by R. W. Blackmore), Oxford, 1542. 

Munster, Council of, 1279 a.p., Mansi, XXIV. 

Neale, 1. M., An Earnest Plea jor the Retention oj the Scotch 
Liturgy: A Letter to the Lord Bishop oj Brechin, London, 
1862. A History oj the Holy Eastern Church, Part 1., 
General Introduction, London, 1850. Essays on Litur- 
giology and Church History . . . second edition, with 
Preface by the Rev. R. F. Littledale, LL.D., London, 1867. 

Nestle, E., Novum Testamentum Graece, editio sexta, Stuttgart, 
1906. 

Nicza, Council of, 787 A.p., Mansi, XIII. 


446 BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Nicholas I., Pope, Letter to Michael the Emperor, P.L. cxix. 
*Nicholas Bulgaris, The Holy Catechism, translated by W. E. 
Daniel, and edited by R. R. Bromage, London, 1893. 

Nilus, Epist. ad Phil. Schol., P.G. Ixxix. 

Norwich, Synodical Statutes of, 1257 Α.Ρ., Mansi, XXIII. 

Odo of Cambray, Expositio in Canonem Missae, P.L. clx. 

Odo of Paris, Synodical Constitutions of. 1197 4.p., Mansi, XXII. 

Optatus of Milevis, De Schism. Don., P.L. xi. 

Origen, Contra Celsum, P.G. xi. In S. Matth. xv. 11, P.G. xiii. 

Oxford, Council of, 1222 a.p., Mansi, XXII. 

Overton, J. H., The Nonjurors: Their Lives, Principles and 
Writings, London, 1902. 

Paléographie Musicale, Vol. V., Avant-propos, pp. 55-96, 
Solesmes, 1896. 

Parker, James, An Introduction to the History of the Successive 
/Revisions of the Book of Common Prayer. Oxford and 
London, 1877. *The First Prayer-Book of Edward VI. 
compared with the successive Revisions oj the Book oj Common 
Prayer, Oxford and London, 1877. 

Paschasius Radbertus, De Corpore et Sanguine Domini, P.L. exx. 

Paul Winifred, Life oj Gregory the Great, P.L. Ixxv. 

Perry, Bp. W. S., edited by, Journals of General Conventions 
of the Protestant. Episcopal Church, in the United States, 
1785-1835. Vol. L, 1785-1821, Vol. IL, 1823-1835, 
Vol. IIL, Historical Notes and Documents, Claremont, N. H., 
1874. : 

Persides, N., EPMHNEIA TON IEPON ΤΕΛΕΤΩΝ, second 
edition, Athens, 1903. 

Peter Lombard, Sententiarum Lib. IV., P.L. excii. 

Peter Mansour, De Corpore et Sanguine Christi, P.G. xcv. 
Epist. ad Zech., P.G. xev. 

Peter II. of Alexandria, P.G. Ixxxii. 

Pfalz-Neuberg, Kirchen-Ordnung for, Nürnberg, 1543. 

*Popoff, B. (translated from the Russian by), The History of 
the Council of Florence, London, 1861. 

Poore, Richard, Constitutions of, 1217 A.p., Mansi, XXII. 

Preparatio Sacerdotis, Venice, 1493, in T'racts on the Mass. 

Proclus, De Traditione Div. Liturgiae, P.G. lxv. 

Pseudo-Aleuin, Confessio Fidei, P.L. ci. De Divinis Officiis, 
PD, 

Pseudo-Ambrose, De Sacramentis, P.L. xvi. 

Pullan, L., The History of the Book οἱ Common Prayer, third 
edition, London, 1901. 

Quierci, Synod of, 858 A.p., Mansi, XVIII B. 

Rabanus Maurus, De Institutione Clericorum, P.L. evü. Liber 
de Sacris Ordinibus, etc., P.L. exii. 

Ratramn, Liber de Corpore et Sanguine Domini, P.L. exxi. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 447 


Rattray, Bp. Thomas, #Some Particular Instructions concerning 
the Christian Covenant, ete., London, 1748; reprinted, 
Burntisland, at the Pitsligo Press, 1854. The Ancient 
Liturgy ο) the Church oj Jerusalem, ete., London, 1744. 

*Renaudot, Eusebius, Liturgiarum Orientalium Collectio, Editio 
Secunda Correctior. Two vols., Francofurti ad Moenum, 
1847. 

*Reichel, O. J., Solemn Mass at Rome in the Ninth Century, 
second edition, with additions, London, 1895. 

Rhobotes, P., AEITOYPTIKH, Athens, 1869. 

Riley, Athelstan, Athos or the Mountain oj the Monks, London, 
1557. 

Riviere, l'Abbé J., Le Dogme de la Rédemption, Paris, 1905. 

Rome, Council at, 1079 a.p., P.L. exlviii. 

Rouen, Synod of, 1235 a.p., Mansi, XXIII. 

Rupert of Deutz, Commentaria in Joannem, P.L. elxix. 

Samonas of Gaza, Dialogue with Achmed the Saracen, P.G. exx. 

Schaff, Philip, The Creeds of Christendom, ete., fourth edition, 
revised and enlarged, three vols., New York [1887]. 

Scotland, Provincial Council of, 1225 a.p., Statutes, Mansi, 
XXE. 

Scudamore, W. E., Notitia Eucharistica, second edition, revised 
and enlarged, London, 1576. 

Seabury, Bp. Samuel, Discourses on Several Subjects, two vols., 
Hudson, 1815. 

Shields, Charles, The Book ο) Common Prayer . . . as amended 
by the Westminster Divines . . . and in Agreement with 
the Directory jor Public Worship of the Presbyterian Church 
in the United States, Philadelphia, 1864. Liturgia Ez- 
purgata; or, The Prayer Book amended according to the 
Presbyterian. Revision of 1661, and historically and critically 
reviewed, Philadelphia, 1864. 

Sicard of Cremona, Mitrale, P.L. cexiii. 

Smend, J., Die evangelischen deutschen Messen bis zu Luthers 
Deutscher Messe, Góttingen, 1896. 

*Smirnoff, P., The Instruction in God's Law, translated from the 
Russian, London, 1896. 

Smith, H. W., Life and Correspondence oj the Rev. William Smith, 
D.D., two vols., Philadelphia, 1880. 

*Sokoloff, D., A Manual of the Orthodox Church’s Divine Ser- 
vices, translated from the Russian, New York and Albany, 
1899. 

Sophocles, E. A., Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine 
Periods, Boston, 1870. 

Sprott, G. W., Euchologion, a Book oj Common Order (edited by), 
Edinburgh and London, 1905. Scottish Liturgies of the Reign 
of James VI., edited, with an Introduction and Notes, 


448 BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Edinburgh and London, 1901. *The Book oj Common Order 
oj the Church of Scotland, commonly known as John Knox’s 
Liturgy, with Historical Introduction and Ilustrative 
Notes, Edinburgh and London, 1901. *The Worship and 
Offices of the Church of Scotland, ete., Edinburgh and Lon- 
don, 1882. 

Srawley, J. H., The Catechetical Oration oj Gregory of Nyssa, 
edited by, Cambridge, 1903. 

Stephen of Autun, Tractatus de Sacramento Altaris, P.L. elxxii. 

Stephens, Edward, The Liturgy of the Ancients, represented, as 
near as well may be, in English jorms (1696). A Complete 
Form oj Liturgy, or Divine Service, according to the Usage 
of the Most Ancient Christians (c. 1700). (Both reprinted 
in Vol. II. of the Rev. Peter Halľs Fragmenta Liturgica, 
Bath, 1848.) 

Suicer, J. C., Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus . . . editio tertia . 
Trajecti ad Rhenum, 1746. Two vols. 

Swete, H. B., Eucharistie Belief in the Second and "Third Cen- 
turies, in J. Th. S., Vol. IIL., pp. 161-177 (January, 1902). 

Symeon of Thessalonica, Explanation concerning the Divine 
Temple, etc., P.G. clv. 

Syropulus, Sylvester, History of the Council of Florence (for exact 
title see above, p. 314). 

Taylor, Bp. Jeremy, Works, edited by C. P. Eden, in ten vols., 
London, 1859-1865. 

Tertullian, Adv. Marcion., P.L. ii. 

Theodore of Andida, Commentatio Liturgica, P.G. οκ]. 

Theodoret of Cyrus, Dialogue ii., Inconfusus, P.G. Ixxxiii. 

Theodulph of Orleans, Liber de Ordine Baptismi, P.L. ev. 

Theophilus of Alexandria, Paschal Letter, P.L. xxii. 

Theophylact, Commentaries on Gospels, on First Corinthians, 
P.G. οπή cxxiv. 

Thorndike, Herbert, Works, six vols., A.C.L., Oxford, 1844-1856. 

*Thurston, Herbert, S. J., Genuflexion at Mass, in The Month, 
October, 1897, pp. 391-406. 

Tracts on the Mass, see Legg, J. Wickham. 

Trent, Council of, Canones et Decreta Sacrosancti Oecumenici, et 
Generalis Concilii. Tridentini, . . . Romae, 1564. 

Tréves, Provincial Council of, 1227 a.p., Mansi, XXIII. 

*Washington, G., Points of Divergence between the Anglican and 
Eastern Churches, London, 1902. 

"Watterich, J., Der Konsekrationsmoment im heiligen Abendmahl, 
und seine Geschichte, Heidelberg, 1896. 

Westeott, B. F., and F. 4. A. Hort, The New Testament in the 
Original Greek, two vols., New York, 1882. 

Wheatly, Charles, A Rational Illustration oj the Book of Common 
Prayer, etc., Oxford, 1846. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 449 


White, Bp. William, Memoirs ο) the Protestant Episcopal Church 
in the United States ο) America, edited with notes by B. F. 
De Costa, New York, 1880. 

William of Paris, Additions to the Constitutions of Gallo, 1208 
A.D., Mansi, XXII. 

Williams, G., The Orthodox Church of the East in the Eighteenth 
Century, etc., London, 1868. 

Wilson, H. A., The Gelasian Sacramentary, Oxford, 1894. 

Wilson, Bp. Thomas, Works, seven vols., A.C.L., Oxford, 1847— 
1863. 

*Wordsworth, Bp. John, Bishop Sarapion’s Prayer Book, Lon- 
don, 1899. 

Worcester, Synod of, 1240 a.p., Mansi, XXIII. 

*Wotherspoon, H. J., The Second Prayer Book of King Edward 
the Sixth (1552) . . . (and The Liturgy of Compromise . . . 
edited by G. W. Sprott), Edinburgh and London, 1905. 

Wriothesley, C., A Chronicle of England, etc., Vol. II., Camden 
Society, 1877. 


MANUSCRIPTS 


British Museum, Additional MS. 15,222, ff. 27v-39r, Ordo Ro- 
manus, adapted for the use of Besancon, X. Century. 
British Museum, Additional MS. 17,004, ff. 108v-116v, Ordo 

Romanus, adapted for use of Amiens, c. 1050 A.p. 
Bodleian MS. Lat. liturg. d. 4. [31,535], Canon Missae, ff. 20r- 
22r, Gregorian Sacramentary, Como, Italy, XI. Century. 
Bodleian MS. Tanner 169*, part 3 [9995], Calendar ete., Canon 
Missae on pp. 149-150, 1155 A.n. 

British Museum, Additional MS. 15,120, Canon Missae, ff. 135r- 
136v, Missal from Bergamo, Italy, XIV. Century. 

British Museum, Additional MSS. 30,844; 30,845; 30,846. 
Mozarabic Missals (incomplete), X. Century. 


INDEX 


Abyssinian Anaphora of our Lord, 
73-74. 

Addai and Mari, Liturgy of, 73. 

Agobard of Lyons, 134, 154 n. 2: 
368. . 

Aleuin, 131-132 : 366. 

Alger of Liege, 159 : 392-393. 

“Alteration and Amendment, 
chief,” Preface passim, 227, 
238, 241. 

Amalarius, 141-142 : 371-373. 

Ambrose (S.), of Milan, 46-51: 
256-257. 

Ambrosian Liturgy, 49, 123 n. 1: 
358. 

Anaphora, 

Apostolic, 31. 

Equivalent to Canon Missae, 3. 

Equivalent to Prayer of Conse- 
cration, 50. 

Two main elements of, 27-28, 33, 
44—45, 117-118, 119 n. 2. 

᾿Αναφορά, Christ's, 28. 

Anastasius Sinaita, 79 : 280. 

Andrewes, Bp., 185-186. 

Answer of Great Church of Constanti- 
nople to Papal Encyclical on 
Union, 114 : 333-334. 

Antididagma, 180, 181-183, 
191 :419-422. 

Apostolie Constitutions, Liturgy of, 
43-44, 104, 214 : 253-254. 

Armenian Liturgy, 87-88, 95-96, 
ποτε dle 

Arras, Synod of, 154-155 :387. | 

Athanasius (S.), of Alexandria, 
40 : 251. 

Augustine (S), of Hippo, 63-65, 
156: 267-269. 


187, 


Basil (S., of Cesarea, 20 n. 2, 
46: 256. 

. Liturgy of, 86, 91, 105 : 289-290. 

Beardsley, Rev. E. E., D.D., Life, 
ete., of Bp. Seabury, 222 


n. 1, 227 n. 3, 228 n. 2. 


Becon, Thomas, 174 n. 3. 

Bede, Venerable, 83 : 287. 

Bellarmine, 187. , 

Berengarian Controversy, 34 n. 3, 
155. 

Berengar of Tours, 150, 155-158: 
387. 

Bernardakis, D. N., 113 : 332-333. 

Bernold of Constance, see Mierolo- 
gus. 

Bessarion, 102, 103. 

Bethune-Baker, Rev. J. H., 36 n. 
1,38 n. 1, 42n. 1. 

Bingham, Rev. Joseph, 

203. 

Bishop, see Gasquet and Bishop. 

Book of Common Worship, 210 
τ dc 

Box, Rev. G. H., 29 n. 4. 

Bramhall, Abp., 191. 

Brentz, John, 177. 

Brett, Bp. Thomas, 98 n. 2, 200 n. 
2, 214, 215-217, 236 n. 2. 

Brightman, Rev. F. E., Liturgies 
Eastern and. Western, 13, 28 
nn. 1 and 2, 41 n. 1, 45 n. 3, 
70 n. 2, 73 n. 2, 89 nn. 2 and 
4, 117 n. 4, 161 n. 2. 

Bruno of Segni, 161-162 : 389. 

Bucer, 183, 204. 

Burbidge, Rev. Edward, 123 n. 2, 
128 n. 3. 

Burekard, John, see Ordo Missae. 


DD. 


Cabasilas, Nicholas (Abp. of Thessa- 


lonica), 91-96, 187 :296— 
306. 
Cabrol, Dom F., 3 n. 3, 49 n. 3, 
750m 
Cesarius of Arles, 76-78: 278- 
279. 
Cajetan, Cardinal James, 171,173: 
400-403. 


Calvin, John, 206. 
Campbell, Bp. Archibald, 200 n. 3, 
214, 219-220. 


451 


452 


Canon Missae, 

Analysis, of, 126-131. 

Considered equivalent to Anaph- 
ora, 3, 50 n. 1. 

Considered equivalent to Con- 
firmatio Sacramenti, 131. 

Considered equivalent to Words 
of Declaration only, 177-178. 

Discussed, 122-131. 

Invocation in, see Supplices te. 
Rationale of, original, 34, 131, 
144—145, 156-157. 
Rationale of, perverted, 

146-149, 150, 153-154. 
Text of, 123-126 : 359-361. 
Carlstadt, 177 : 413. 
Caroline Books, 87, 132-133 : 366- 
367. 
Carthusian Statutes, 166-167 :395. 
Catechism, see Bernardakis, Forbes 
(Robert), Persides, Russian. 
Chosroes, the Great, 87-88 :291- 


129, 


292. 
Christ, 
Blessed the elements;  conse- 
crated the Eucharist by 


prayer, 25, 26, and n. 1, 27— 
29, 54 and n. 3, 55, 64, 67, 
76-77,95, 108-109, 134, 186— 
187, 187-188, 191, 192-193, 
195, 196, 197, 204, 205-206, 
212, 215, 240-241, 242. 
Taught His disciples to conse- 
crate by prayer, 28-29, 40 
n. 3, 108, 135. 
Chrysostom (S.), John, 50 nn. 3 and 
4, 56-59, 92-93 : 261-263. 
Liturgy of, 86, 91, 105 : 287-289. 
Church Quarterly Review, The, 70 
n. 1, 119. n. 2, 180 n. 2, 181 
ni. 190 n.l. 
Church Times, The, 185 n. 1. 
Ciconiolanus, see Directorium. 
Clement of Alexandria, 28 n. 4 :249. 
Clermont, Synod of, 170 : 398-399. 
Cologne, Synod of, 170:399. 
Chapter of, see Antididagma. 
Collier, Bp. Jeremy, 214, 236 n. 2. 
Conformatio (Confirmatio) Sacra- 
menti, 81, 121, 131:282, 
354, 366. 
Confusion of Institution and Ob- 
servance, 129, 149-150, 155, 
158. 


INDEX 


Consecration of Eucharist, 

Effected by the Church's prayer 
or Invocation, 8-9, 13, 18, 
36-37, 39-40, 45, 50-51, 53— 
54, 58, 60, 62, 76-77, 92-94, 
97-98, 101, 104, 106-107, 
109,111, 113; 122) 1317143! 
145, 187, 189, 190-191, 193— 
194, 201-203, 204, 206, 209, 
211-212, 242. 

“Form’’ of, 

American, Preface, passim, 16 
and n. 1, 17-18, 241-242. 
Apostolie, 30-33, 214, 225. 
Early Church, 13, 33, 49 and 
n. 3, 199, 202, 212-213, 225. 
Eastern unbroken tradition, 34 
n.1, 91 seg., 97-98, 106-108, 
110-111, 114. 
English, 16 n. 1, 17, 186, 205- 
206, 224, 230, 241, 431-433. 
Gallican, 78, 116-118, 122. 
Mozarabic, 80-82, 118-119, 
121-122. 
Nonjurors’, 211, 214-220. 
Roman (Scholastic), 34 and n. 
3, 38, 47, 54,76, 80 and n.3, 
92-95, 100-101, 110, 113- 
114, 115, 129, 142, 146 seg., 
175, 185, 187, 195-197, 199, 
201, 203, 225, 228. 
Scottish, 16 n. 1, 17, 18, 205, 
209, 225. 

Holy Spirit, why invoked in, 66, 
74-76 :270-271, 277-278. 

Not effected by recitation of 
Narrative of Institution, 18, 
88 n. 3, 47, 57, 93-95, 104, 
109, 136, 192, 228. 

Not regarded as completed until 
end of Invocation proper, 8, 
18, 49 and n. 3, 50-51, 69-70. 

Rationale of, in New Testament, 
19-33. 

Rubries or Regulations governing 
Second Consecration, 16-18, 
185-186, 205-206, 209, 232— 
233, 241-242. 

Constantinople, Couneil of 
(754 A.D.), 85 :285-286. 


Cooper, Rev. James, 208 n. 4, 
210 n. 1. 

Coptic Jacobites, Liturgy of, 117 
n. 4, 126 n. 2. 


INDEX 453 
Corinthians, First Epistle to, Eucharist, 
x. 16, 29-30. Distinguished from Passover, 21, 
xi. 23-26, 4, 19, 22-23, 76, 180, 24-27. 
182, 209. How consecrated by Christ, 26- 
xiv. 16, 17, 30. 27. 
Cosin, Bp. John, 8 n. 1, 98 n. 2, How consecrated by Church, 13, 
189-190. 31-33, 36, 39. 
Crakanthorp, Dr. Richard, 98 n. 2, Instituted by Christ after Pass- 
186-187. over, 19-29. 


Cranmer, Abp. Thomas, 4, 5, 7, 
. 175-180, 183, 184, 234. 
Cyprian (S.), of Carthage, 39 : 250-- 
251. 

Cyril (S.), of Alexandria, 20 n. 2, 
66-67 : 270-271. 

Cyril (S.), of Jerusalem, 44—45, 49, 
80, 116: 254-255. 


Damascene (S.), John, 83-85 : 283— 
285. 

Deacon, Bp. Thomas, 214, 217—218. 

Holy Liturgy of, 217, 427-428. 

Delisle, M. Léopold, 143 n. 1. 

De Vert, Dom Claude, 138 n. 2, 
142 n. 1, 158 n. 2. 

De Vignay, Jean, 173 and n. 2. 

Dictionnaire ďArchéologie Chré- 
tienne et de Liturgie, 3 n. 8, 
40 mi. 501 ns 1, 117 m. S 
132 n. 2. 

Didache, The, 35 n. 1. 

Dionysius bar Salibi, 89 :294. 

Dionysius of Alexandria, 39-40: 
251. 

Directorium. Divinorum Officiorum, 
173 n. 3, 408-409. 

Dowden, Bp. John, 190 n. 2, 208 
η. 4 210 n. 1, 215 n. 1, 219 
n. 1, 228 n. 1. 

Duchesne, Mgr. L., 47 n. 1, 49 n. 2, 
116 n. 2, 128 n. 1, 129-130, 
138 n. 3. 

Duns Scotus, see Scotus. 

Durandus of Mende, 160 : 394. 

Durandus of Troarn, 156 : 388. 


Ebner, Dr. Adalbert, 3 n. 3. 
Egyptian Rite, 117 n. 4, 126 n. 2. 
Elevation, see Gestures. 

Ephraem Syrus, 59-60 : 263-264. 
Epiklesis, see Invocation. 
Ἐπίκλησις, Christ's, 28. 

Erigena, John Scotus, 155. 
Ethiopie Church Ordinances, 40-41. 


Rationale of Christ's, 25-27. 
See also Christ, Consecration of 
Eucharist. 
Εὐλογεῖν, 25, 27—30, 193, 199. 
Εὐλογία, 28, 29, 197. 
Eusebius Bruno, 156 :388. 
Eusebius of Alexandria, 79:279. 
Eusebius of Cesarea, 20 n. 2, 40 n. 
3.2251, 
Eustratius Argentes, 29, 108-109, 
110 n. 1:324-330. 
Eutychius of Constantinople, 79: 
279-280. 
Ἐὐχαριστεῖν, 25, 27-28, 30, 193, 
199. 
Ἐὐχαριστία, 27-28, 30, 197. 
Ἐὐχολόγιον τὸ μέγα, 111: 330-331. 
Exeter, Synod of, 170-171 : 400. 


Falconer, ΒΡ. W., 221. 

Firmilian of C:esarca, 39 : 250. 

Florence, Council of, 98-104, 115 
n.1:311-316. 

Florus, 129 n. 1, 150-153 : 381-385. 

Forbes, Bp. Robert, 221. 

Forbes, Bp. William, 190-191. 

Frankfort, Couneil of, 87, 132. 

Frankland, Rev. W. B., 20 n. 2. 

Frere-Procter, 123 n. 2, 128 nn. 1 
and 3, 141 n. 2. 

Froude, see Tracts for the Times. 

Fulgentius of Ruspe, 75-76, 277- 


278. 

Gabriel of Philadelphia, 105 : 323— 
324. 

Gallican Liturgy, 78, 87, 116-118, 
122, 131. 


Gasquet and Bishop, 5 n. 2. 

Gaudentius of Brescia, 68 : 272. 

Gee, Rev. Henry, D.D., 185. 

Gelasius I., Pope, 74, 128 : 276-277. 

Genuflection, see Gestures. 

Gerbert, Dom Martin, 143 nn. 2, 
3 and 4. 


454 


German (Lutheran) Church Orders, 
Brandenburg-Nürnberg, 1533, 5, 


Ua μα Mee 

Carlstadt, for Wittenberg, 1522, 
177 : 413. 

Hermän’s Deliberatio, 180-181, 
183. 


Hertzog Heinrich, 1539, 180. 

Hesse-Cassel, 1539, 180. 

Kaspar Kantz, 1522, 179 :415- 
417. 

Luther’s Formula Missae, 1523, 
177 :414-415. 


Pfalz-Neuberg, 1543, 179-180: 
418-419. 
Strassburg, 15241, 179 m 9: 
417. 
Gestures connected with the Invo- 
cation, 


Low bow at opening of, 13, 72, 
140-145 passim, 276, 363, 
365, 373, 375, 408, 411. 

Still persists in Canon Missae, 
141 n. 1. 

Prostration after the Invocation, 
107. 

Gestures in the Narrative of Insti- 
tution, 

Mimetic, 

Bread and cup picked up, 6-7, 
70-71, 140, 144, 161, 162, 
163, 164, 165, 166. 

Cross, sign of, made over them, 
139-140, 144, 161, 162, 163, 
164, 165, 165. 

Fraction of Bread, 6, 7, 8, 174 
n. 4, 181 n. 1. 

Perversion of, 

Distinction made between pick- 
ing up and holding aloft, 
165, 166, 167-171: 

Elevation of host, 155, 159, 
165, 180. 

Not to be made till after 
Hoc est corpus meum, 
167-171. 

Prohibited, 2, 7, 174. 

Exaggeration and prolonging 
of picking up elements, 8-9, 
158, 163, 164, 165. 

Inclination or bow after Hoc 
est corpus meum, 171-172. 
Exaggeration of this new 

gesture, 172-173. 


INDEX 


Genuflection developed out 
of bow, 173. 
Not ordered in England, 
174. 
Stereotyped in Pian 
Missal, 174. 


Gillespie, 210 n. 1. 

Gore, Bp., 35 n. 1, 146 n. 1, 150 n. 1, 
154 n. 3. 

Grabe, Dr. John Ernest, 200-203. 

Greeks, Declaration of, to Marquis 
de Nointel, 106-107 : 323. 

Gregory Dialogos, Liturgy of, 184 
mal 


Gregory of Nyssa, 32 n. 2, 50 n. 4, 
60-63 : 265-266. 

Gregory the Great, Pope, 78-79, 
128 : 280-281. 

Guitmund of Aversa, 156:388. 


Handbook, A, treating of the Seven 

M ysteries, 110:330. 

Rev. Samuel, D.D., 

: nn. 1 and 2. 

Hayward, 188. 

Headlam, Rev. A. C., 110 n. 2. 

Henry de Segusia, 178:413-414. 

Herman von Wied, 150, 183. 

Hickes, ΒΡ. George, 81 n. 1, 200, 
213-214. 

Hildebert of Tours, 
390. 

Honorius III., Pope, 168:396. 

Honorius of Autun, 162:389- 
390. 

Hooker, Rev. Richard, 26 n. 1. 

Hoppe, Dr. Ludwig Augustin, 25 
n. 1, 127-128, 141 n. 1, 145- 
146. 

Hort, Dr. F. J. A. (see also Westcott 
and Hort), 27 n. 1. 

Hugo of S. Vietor, 164-165 : 391— 
392. 


Hart, 228 


163, 165: 


Iconoclastie Council, see Constanti- 
nople, Council of. 

Illation, Invocation in, see Invoca- 
tion. 

Indutus Planeta, 173 τι. 3:408. 

Institution, Narrative of, see Narra- 


tive. 
Institution of Eucharist, see 
Eucharist. 


Introduction, An, ete., 240-241. 


INDEX 


Invocation, The, 
American, meaning and purpose 
of, 13-18, 231-234. 
American identical with Scottish 
in meaning, 14-18, 231-234, 
432, 433. 
Forms of, 
Anglican, 13-15, 176, 185, 189— 
190, 194-195, 199, 204, 207-- 
209, 214-215, 224-225, 231— 
238, 240-241, 424, 426, 428, 
430, 435, 436. 
Eastern, 41-44, 72-74 :252- 
253, 254, 276, 288-289, 290. 
German, 179-180, 416-418. 
Presbyterian forms of, 210 n. 1. 
Western, 55, 78, 116-121, 124, 
125: 900, 279, 334-358, 361, 
Normal position of, 175, 213. 
215 n. 2, 216-217. 
Precedes Narrative sometimes, 
117-119, 179-180, 350, 351, 
353, 358, 416-418. 
Preliminary additional Invoca- 
tion, 42, 54, 117 n. 4, 124, 
143, 175, 178, 360. 
Restored in 1789, Preface, pas- 
sim, 229. 
Title indented, 13. 
Trenzeus (S.), 36-38, 63, 183 : 248— 
249. 
Isidore of Kieff, 101-102, 103 : 313— 
314, 315-316. 
Isidore of Pelusium, 66 :270. 
Isidore of Seville, 13 n. 1, 80-82, 
115-116, 122 n. 4, 131 : 282- 
283. 


Jacobs: Dr ἘΠ 5 n. ο 177 nek. 
James of Edessa, 82-83 : 287. 
James (S.), Liturgy of, 3, 70-73, 
105, 214: 273-2760. 
James (S.), Liturgy of, Syriac, 70. 
Jerome, 65-66 : 269-270. 
Jerome (the Greek), 66:270. 
Jerusalem, Liturgy of, see S. Cyril 
of Jerusalem. 
Jewish Encyclopaedia, The, 27 n. 2. 
John ρα αι 67:241: 
vi. 48-52, 88:293. 
vi. 49-52, 47. 
vi. 63, 221. 
Johnson, John, 27 n. 2, 112 n. 1, 
211-213, 214. 


455 


Journals of General Convention, 
229 n. 1, 206 n. 2, 231 n. 1. 
Justin Martyr (S.), 28, 30, 35-36: 


247-248. 
Kantz, Kaspar, of Nördlingen, 
179 : 415-417. 


Kidd, Rev. B. J., 4 nn. 1 and 2. 
Kings, First Book of, xviii. 36-38, 
50 n; 2. 


Lambert, Rev. J. C., 20 n. 2. 
Lathbury, Rev. T., 215 n. 1. 
Laud, Abp., 1, 2, 8 n. 1, 208, 210. 
Le Brun, R. P. Pierre, 34 n. 2, 96 
n: 1. 95 n: 2, 146: 5, 176 
ni 1 
Leofrie Missal, 3. 
L'Estrange, Hamon, 199-200. 
Liber Ordinum, 118 nn. 2 and 3, 
121: 354-358. 
Lichoudi, Sophronius and Joanni- 
cius, 107. 
Lombard, Peter, see Peter Lom- 
bard. 
Luke (S.), 1. 3, 24. 
124164 ος αἱ. 
xxii. 14-20, 5, 19, 20-24. 
xxii. 19, 66:270-271. 
Luther, Martin, 177-179 : 414—415. 


Malzew, Alexios, 107 n. 3. 
Manual Acts, see Gestures. 
Manuel, Great Rhetor, 91 : 296. 
Mark (S.), xiv. 22-25, 19, 21-24. 
Liturgy of, 117 n. 4, 126 n. 2. 
Mass, Canon of, see Canon Missae. 
Materialistie Theology of Eucharist, . 
146 and nn. 1 ard 2, 154. 
Matt. (S.), xv. 11, 32 n. 2, 38:249. 
xxvi. 26-29, 5, 19, 21-24, 110. 
xxvi. 26, 67, 199: 271. 
Maxwell, ΒΡ. John, 208. 
Mayence, Council of, 170:398. 
Medvedeff, Sylvester, 107. 
Memorial, Idea of in Eucharist, 
10-13. 
Micrologus, 142, 161 :374-375. 
Missal, Bergamo, 143 n. 5. 
Mozarabie, 118-122 : 339-354. 
Pian, 167 n. 2, 172, 174 : 410-411. 
Roman (1555), 173 n. 3:409- 
410. 
Missale Francorum, 3. 


450 


Missale 
339. 
Missaie Gothicum, 118 : 335-338. 


Gallicanum Vetus, 


Missale Plenum (XII. century), 
141 n. 4:365. 
Missale Richenovense, 116-117: 
334-335. : 


Morton, Bp. Thomas, 187-188. 
Moschus, John, 79-80 : 281-282. 
Mouravieff, A. N., 107 n. 2. 
Munster, Couneil of, 170:399. 


Narrative of Institution, 

Combined with the Oblation, 
41-42. 

New Testament accounts, 19-29. 
Rationale of, 24-27, 29, 161. 
Table of, 22-23. 

Omitted, 73. 

Passed over, 45, 81-82. 

Quoted historically in Liturgies, 
33, 41-42, 45, 53-54, 73, 
92-93, 98, 104-105, 109-113, 
118, 127, 132, 139-140, 188, 
193-195, 201, 203. 

Quoted historically in Prayer of 
Consecration, 4-9, 33, 242. 

Text of, in Liturgies, 41-43, 54— 
55, 70-71,74, 124-125 : 252- 
253, 259, 274-275, 288, 289, 
339-340, 355, 360, 416-417, 
419, 422, 423, 425-426, 427, 
429. 

Text of, in Prayer of Consecra- 
tion, Preface, xxiv, 5-7. 

Warrant or Charter of Eucharis- 
tie Observance, 9, 18, 33, 50- 
51, 58, 80. 

Neale, Rev. J. M., D.D., 343 n. 1. 

Nestle, Dr. Eberhard, 22-24. 

Nestorian Liturgy, see Addai and 
Mari. 

Nieza, Council of (787 A.D.), 85- 
86 : 286. 

Nicholas Cabasilas, see Cabasilas. 

Nicholas I., Pope, 194: 369. 

Nilus, 63 : 267. 


Nonjurors, 
Liturgy of, 3, 214-215, 424- 
426. 
Theology of, 211, 214-221, 233- 
234. 


Norwich, Statutes 
398. 


of, 169-170: 


INDEX 


338- | Oath of Russian Bishop, 107 : 323. 


Oblation, The, 
Combined with Narrative, 41-42. 
Forms of, 
Anglican, 9-12, 423-424, 426, 
- 427, 429-430. 
Eastern, 41, 42, 43-44, 71, 73, 
74:252, 253, 275, 288, 289— 
290. 
Western, 56, 116-121, 
260, 335-358, 360-361. 
Rationale of, 9-13. 
Relation to the Invocation, 13. 
Restored in 1789, Preface, pas- 
sim, 229. 
Title indented, 12. 
Odo of Cambray, 162 : 388-389. 
Odo of Paris, 167 : 395-396. 
Optatus of Milevis, 46: 255. 
Ordo Missae, of John Burckard, 
173 : 406-407. 
Ordo Missarum, 139 n. 3:365. 
Ordo Romanus 1., 137-138, 139, 
141 : 362. 
Ordo Romanus 1. (edited by Ateh- 
ley), 137 n. 3, 138 n. 3, 139 
n. 4. 
Ordo Romanus 11., 139-140: 363. 
Ordo Romanus XIV., 171-173: 
400-403. 
Ordo Romanus, Amand (S.), 138- 
139 : 364. 
Ordo Romanus. Amiens, 139 : 365. 
Ordo Romanus, Besancon, 139 :364— 
365. 
Origen, 32 n. 1, 38-39 : 249-250. 
Orthodox Confession, 105-106, 110 
n. 4:321-322. 
Osiander, 7, 177. 
Overton, Rev. J. H., D.D., 215 n. 1. 
Oxford, Council of, 168-169 : 396— 


129: 


397. 
Paléographie Musicale, 123 n. 2, 
141 n. 2. 
Parker, James, 190 n. 2. 
Paschasius Radbertus, 146-150, 


154 n. 1:376-381. 
Passover, Last, distinct from Eu- 
charist, 21, 24—25. 
Paul (S.), 24, 29-32. 
Paul Winifred, 79 : 280-281. 
Persides, N., 110 n. 4:334. 
Peter Lombard, 159-160 : 393. 


INDEX 


Peter Mansour, 85 :285. 

Peter Martyr, 183. 

Peter II. of Alexandria, 60 : 264. 

Poore, Bp. Richard, Constitutions 
of, 168 : 396. 

Post Mysterium, 116:336, 338. 

Post Pridie, 116 n. 2, 119-123 : 131— 
132 : 340-358. 

Post Sanctus, 3, 78, 116-119, 121: 
350, 351, 353, 358. 

Post Secreta, 116-117 : 335—339. 

Prayer of Consecration, The, 

Deficiency of English, Preface, 
passim, 184 and n. 1, 200-- 
203, 224-225, 228, 230. 

Equivalent parts of other Litur- 
gies, 40-44, 54-56, 70-74, 
116, 121: 252-254, 259-260, 
273-276, 287-290, 339-340, 
354-355, 359-361, 415-419, 
(422), 423-430. 

Name, why appropriate, 1, 2. 

Name emphasized in 1892, 2. 

Name first given, 1-2, 6. 

Normal sequence of parts, 213, 
215 n. 2, 216-217, 225. 

Primitive sequence of parts, 215 
n. 2, 225, 239, 242. 

Rationale of, 16, 18, οἵ. 217-220, 
225, 231-235, 238, 240. 

Restoration of Oblation and 
Invocation in 1789, Preface, 
passim, 229, 238, 241. 

Scottish, used by Rev. William 
Smith, 224-227. 

Scottish and American forms 
identical in purport and 
rationale, 231-235, 238, cf. 
432, 433. 

Text and Phraseology examined, 
1-18. 

Title, where found, 1-2. 

Var ant uses of Title, 

equals Invocation only, 18 n. 1. 

equals Invocation par excel- 
lence, 18. 

includes Narrative also, 1, 2. 

includes Narrative, Oblation, 
and Invocation, 16 and n. 1. 

See also, Invocation, Oblation, 
and Narrative. 

Prayer of Humble Access mis- 
placed, 3. 
Proclus, 68 : 272. 


457 


Pseudo-Aleuin, 154 n. 2: 385-386. 
Pseudo-Ambrose, 51-56 : 258-260. 
Pullan, Rev. L., 208 n. 4. 


Quaestiones V. et N. Testamenti, 
128 n. 1:251-252. 
Quam oblationem, 124, 126, 143: 
360. 
Guierci, Council of, 142, 155 :374. 
Qui pridie, 124-125 : 360. See also 
Canon Missae. 
Christ alleged to respeak His 
words in, 149, 152, 158. 
Rationale of, 118, 135-136. 
Rubrics in, see Gestures. 
Rabanus Maurus, 135-137, 157: 
369-371. 
Ratramn, 150, 155 :375-376. 
Rattray, Bp. Thomas, 3, 7, 8 n. 2, 
218-219, 428-430. 
Rhobotes, P., 111-113: 331-332. 
Riley, Mr. Athelstan, 184 n. 1. 
Riviere, l'Abbé J., 20 n. 2. 
Roman Mistake in re Eucharistie 
Consecration, 110, 113, 114. 
When it arose, 146-154. 
Romans, xv. 16, 30-31, 213-214. 
Rome, Council of, 155:387. 
Rouen, Synod of, 169:397. 
Rubrie (e) in Narrative, signifi- 
cance of, 8 and n. 2. 
Rubries in Invocation, 7, 426, 428, 


430. 
Rubries in Narrative, 2, 6-8, 425, 
427, 429. 
Significance of, 7-9, 174 n. 4, 
184 n. 1. 


Rubries in Oblation, 427. 

Rubries preceding Prayer of Conse- 
cration, 1-2, 6. 

Rupert of Deutz, 152 n. 1:393. 

Russian Church, Longer Catechism 
of, 110-111. 


Sacramentary of S. Blaise, 143. 

Sacramentary, Gallican, 116 n. 2. 

Sacramentary, Gelasian, 3, 122- 
126 : 359—361. 

Sacramentary, Gregorian, 143 n. 5. 

Sacramentary of Gellona, 3. 

Sacramentary of Serapion, 41-43, 
63-64, 117 n. 4, 126 n. 2: 
252-253. 


458 


Sacrifice, 
Definition of, Isidore of Seville, 
80, 116, 150: 283. 
Definition of, Rabanus Maurus, 
135 : 969. 
Essential element of, 12-13. 
Eucharistie, 4, 9-12, 211-212, 
213-214, 217-218, 219-220, 
227, 239-240. 
Sadler, Rev. M. F., 25 n. 1. 
Samonas of Gaza, 88 :292-293. 
Sancroft, Abp., 14-15, 190 n. 2. 
Sanctus, 3, 9, 16 n. 1, 45. 
Sarum Use, 7, 174:412. 
Savoy Conference, 210. 
Schaff, Rev. Philip, D.D., 206 n. 2, 
207-91" 
Scotist view of Eucharistie Conse- 
cration, 181, 183. 
Scotland, Provincial Couneil of, 
169 : 397. 
Scotus, Duns, 176 n. 1:403-404. 
Scudamore, Rev. W. E., 9 n. 1, 
141. m 745 25 ae Ἱ 32071 8, 
178 n. 2, 343 n. ]. 
Seabury, Bp. Samuel, 
Concordate, 222-223. 
Letter to Bp. White, 228-229. 
Second Charge, 227. 
Sermon on Eucharist, 239-240. 
Sets forth Communion Office, 2, 
8, 10-17, 227—228. 
Seabury, Rev. W. J., D.D., 226 n. 2, 
231 n. 1, 430-434. 
Shields, Rev. Charles 
nr 
Sicard of Cremona, 163 n. 1:394. 
Smend, Dr. Julius, 179 n. 2. 
Sprott, Rev. G. W., 207 n. 2. 
Srawley, Rev. J. H., 62 n. 1. 
Stephen of Autun, 164:391. 
Stephens, Rev. Edward, Liturgy 
of, 215 n. 2, 423-424. 
Suicer, 28, nn. 1. and 2. 
Summary and Conclusion, 238, 
241-243. 
Supplices te, 125 : 361. 
.Cabasilas on, 94-95 : 303-305. 
Duchesne on, 129-130. 
. Equivalent to Greek Invocation, 
99-101, 127-133, 138-139, 
143, 148, 153-154, 156-160. 
Hoppe on, 127 nn. 1 and 2, 145- 
146. 


W., 210 


INDEX 


Stumbling-block to Roman Cath- 
olie writers, 153. 
Symbolical phraseology of, 127- 


130, 133. 
Textual variants of, 128 n. 2: 

362. 

Sursum Corda, 3, 16 n. 1, 39, 44, 
64, 82, 92. 

Swete, Rev. Henry, D.D., 27 n. 1, 
28 n. 1. 

Symeon of "Thessalonica, 96-98: 
306-311. 

Syropulus, Sylvester, 102-103: 
314-316. 


Taylor, Bp. Jeremy, 191-195, 214. 
Tertullian, 20 n. 2, 38:250. 
Theodore of Andida, 90 : 295. 
Theodoret of Cyrus, 68-69:272- 


78: 
Theodulph of Orleans, 133-134: 
367-368. 


Theophilus of Alexandria, 63 : 267. 
Theophylact, 88 : 293. 

Thomist view of Eucharistie Con- 
secration, 176, 186. 
Thorndike, Rev. Herbert, 26 n. 1, 

27 n. 2, 32 n. 3, 195-198, 
214. 
Timothy, First, iv. 4, 5, 
148 n. 2. 
Tracts for the Times (No. 63), 18 n. 1. 
Trent, Council of, 26 n. 1. 
Tréves, Council of, 169: 397. 
Tridentine Missal, see Missal, Pian. 


31-32, 


Unde et Memores, 12, 125, 127, 135- 
135, 157 :360. 


Verba Testamenti, 177. 


Warrant, Christ's, see Words of 
Institution, cf. Narrative of 
Institution. 

Watterich, Dr. Johannes, 25 n. 1, 
119 n. 3. 

Wedderburne, Bp. James, 1, 2, 208. 

Westminster Directory, 209. 

Wheatly, Rev. Charles, 203-206, 

240 n. 2. 

Bp. 

234-238. 

William of Paris, 168 : 396. 

Williams, Rev. George, 215 n. 1. 


White, William, 228-230, 


INDEX 459 


Wilson, Bp. Thomas, 198-199. 
Witness, Patristie, Chapter III., 
pp. 34 seg. 
Incidental character of, 34, 69. 
Liturgical, Eastern, 40-45, 70- 
74. 
Liturgical, Western, 49-51, 53— 
56, 115-145. 
Worcester, Synod of, 169 :398. 
Word, may mean the Holy Spirit, 
36 n. 1, 41-42. 
Word, prayer of the, 36 and n. 
1 


Word, the Personal, 36-37, 40-42, 
57, 61—65, 74, 83-84. 
Words, Christ's, 
of Declaration, 9, 25, 26, 36, 
38. 
Misused, 149, 152, 154, 228. 


Recitation of, does not conse- 
crate Eucharist, 38 n. 3, 41, 
47, 53-54, 57, 108-111, 113, 
136, 142. 
of Institution and Declaration 
become effectual at each 
Eucharist through the 
Church’s Prayer or Invoca- 
tion, 8-9, 33, 50-51, 53-54, 
57-60, 77-78, 83-84, 91-94, 
97-98, 100-105, 148 n. 2, 
242. 
of Institution or Command, 9, 
18, 25, 37, 50-52, 58, 89-90. 
Words of Consecration (so called), 
17, 188, 205, ef. 208. 
Wriothesley’s Chronicle, 178-179. 


Ximenes, Cardinal, 118, 121. 


* = a TOS 
ip u d sasi. 
% M = 
u € 
= ἢ 
ἢ Ϊ © vf“ 
nio N 
δ y - 
͵ f [ 
. ) 
" A 
E δὲ \ 


E n 
a N 1 
2 N 


U". 
εἶ 5 
J 
"vs = 
" 
- - 4 3 
A 
X 
a 
f= 
T 
-- 
i. & 
\ 
B 
> 
' 
x 
yj 
a 
LJ 
x ^ 
" 
δα. 
1 
> PA 


eh 


A μίαν ων, 
Cum hg M^ ex M 


hy ewe: aac 


LS He CE Se n p.a δ y AMAA 


& 

M" 

% 
᾿ 
UA 419 
WT Sn 
e X 
x 

- 

5 ᾿ ZEN 
V 
vitu, 

x B 
3 
" 7 

„ ah Ὁ 

i A 

4 ει 

᾿ p 

m S u 


EX ΗΝ. 


Ημ ὡς 
κ ο. 


4 Vaj ] 
ira Wes 
5 k ἢ 

(m 


Kur 


ΣᾺ 


Date Due 


